INTRODUCTION TO SET: A Case of Lesson Study Guided by the Framework of

Productive Pedagogies

Joel Artista Joanne Casanova

De La Salle University – Manila De La Salle University – Manila
<joel_artista@dlsu.edu.ph> <joanne_r_casanova@dlsu.ph>

Amelia de Jesus Audric Curtis Dy

De La Salle University – Manila De La Salle University – Manila
<ailema.dejesus@gmail.com> <audricpedy@yahoo.com>

Kristine Jose Marven Manzano

De La Salle University – Manila De La Salle University – Manila
<kristine_r_jose@dlsu.edu.ph> < marven_manzano@dlsu.edu.ph>

Napoleon Montero III Mark Joseph Quinto

De La Salle University – Manila De La Salle University – Manila
<napoleon_monteroiii@dlsu.edu.ph> <mark_joseph_quinto@dlsu.edu.ph>

Paul Jorel Santos Levi Esteban Elipane

De La Salle University – Manila University of the Philippines – Diliman
< paul_jorel_santos@dlsu.edu.ph> De La Salle University - Manila
<levielipane@yahoo.com>

General Comments:

Rethink your FOCUS. This way, you would be able to decide which of the things you have
written are just necessary for the paper. Remember: Not because an idea is good makes it worthy
to be included in a paper that has a clear focus. Think of something that may contribute to the
knowledge of the profession, and not just echoing what others are saying. Think of how your
paper would be unique and would interest the international community of researchers. Good
luck!

This research aims to examine the effectiveness of an inductive-deductive method of teaching to

introduce students to the lesson about set. The researchers who are graduate students of De La
Salle University, Philippines specializing in Mathematics were guided by the key steps of lesson
study and the framework of productive pedagogies as a research tool in evaluating classroom
practice. The result shows that the method of instruction did not become an issue but a number of
recommendations to significantly improve the teaching-learning process was put forward.

Set Theory is considered as a relatively recent development in higher mathematics,

created by the famous mathematician Georg Cantor in the 19th Century. Taught in elementary in

Page 1 of 22
the 1960’s, it had its peak of popularity in between 1970s to 1980s (Where did you get this?
Popular where?). However, the subject was taught at a theoretical and abstract level, making it
hard for the students to learn the lessons (Reference?). In fact, the use of the new terms and
symbols even contributed to the difficulty of the subject (Reference?). The mathematical
breakthrough, referred to as the “New Math”, eventually died in many of the schools due to its
complexity (Garcia, 2012). (Is this in the Philippines?)

(You see, your first paragraphs will serve as the basis of your arguments for the paper. It
would be very important that you present and make use of established ideas/research. Then, what
do you gather from these established knowledge/ideas? It will set the stage for your story, which
is the body of your paper. Cite when necessary. But: this does not mean that you will not already
write about your ideas. This just goes to show that as you make conjectures, and as you
rationalize your paper, the basis of your arguments are from established “facts”/already proven in
some ways.)

However, sets can be taught in a concrete way, and it provides a good basis for later work
in algebra, logic and deductive geometry. A study conducted by Dienes (1970) (Have you read
the paper by Dienes? I think his results are controversial and a lot of researchers disagree with
his strategies.. I am just confirming…) supports this idea by outlining the advantages favoring a
sequence of concrete experiences that permits both teacher and learner to be thoroughly involved
with manipulative materials and allows them to classify experiences according to the kind of
event it is. In addition, the fundamental topics on Set Theory provide a new perspective for the
students with respect to classifying objects, in terms of mathematics, the basic operations of
addition and multiplication. And an opportunity arises to educate students on characterizing
various types of numbers and they are related in terms of sets (Garcia, 2012). (Is Garcia a
Filipino writer? That would be great because he/she might be talking about the Philippine
context. One more thing, Garcia is not in your reference list.)

In the Philippines, set is one of the few additional topics in the newly implemented K to
12 Curriculum. (If you could briefly provide an information regarding the shift of number of
years in basic ed in the last curriculum as opposed to the new K-12 Curriculum, that would give
the readers a better idea of our context. Also, it must be clear that Sets was not a part of the past
curriculum, and is now inserted…) It is part of the Grade 7 Mathematics curriculum and is used
to introduce the notion of real numbers. One of the proponents (who?) of the K-12 curriculum
opined that as mathematics is the language of science, set theory is the language of mathematics
(Reference? Is this written in a document?). It is just logical that students learn the language first
before they learn higher level mathematics. (I’m uncomfortable with this statement.) Whatever
system (Now, what ‘system’ are you talking about? System of what?) is referred to, be it
algebraic system, geometric system or propositional system, discussions are made using the
concept of sets. Proficiency in sets, to say the least, is necessary to acquire proficiency in higher
mathematics (Limjap, 2014). Many students struggle with college mathematics topics due to a
lack of mastery of prerequisite knowledge. For instance, one branch of mathematics where

Page 2 of 22
strong foundation in set theory is necessary is linear algebra. In a study conducted by Dogan-
Dunlap and Hamide (2006), many students' mistakes on linear algebra questions revealed a lack
of mastery of set theory knowledge. Set turns out to be extremely useful since all mathematical
structures can be regarded as sets.(This is a nice content. You just need to organize your thoughts
concisely.)

Currently, several seminars are already being conducted by the Department of Education
to enhance the teaching of sets in schools, but the most effective way (is there really such a
thing? Most effective way?) on how it must be taught is still arguable. It is fitting to tell that
majority of the researchers (you mean, the authors of this paper?) did not encounter the lesson
about set only until college. Thus, they came to agreement to work on the lesson about set and
how to better deliver the topic with best possible result (is there a source of comparison?). They
were convinced that if topics in mathematics like sets are made with complete sense (what is
your criteria for this?), it would be a lot easier for them to teach and a lot easier for students to
learn.

This paper discusses the series of activities conducted by the researchers (you must be
consistent with the use of terms: proponents of this study/authors/researchers… which is which?)
to determine how sets can be effectively taught in the class (Remember that you are not trying to
say that your lesson plan/design would be the best. Just state that you are trying to test a lesson
on Sets and look for some points on how it could be improved, of course, via Lesson Study).
Specifically, this study is conducted to evaluate the appropriateness of the strategies to teach the
notion of sets. For the purpose of this study, inductive-deductive (I will be expecting some
discussion about this as I go on with the paper.) approach has been used. Guided with the basic
principles of lesson study as applied to microteaching (No, what you did was an actual lesson
study, not micro-teaching ), it also purports to examine whether or not the use of such
approach in the instruction of the lesson is effective enough to develop the students’ knowledge
on the said topic. (Please reflect a bit more on this statement. Rethink your purpose. You cannot
come up with the best lesson about a topic because there is not such ‘formula’ for a best lesson.
Look at what the process of engaging in Lesson Study could benefit you, and the lesson.)

The study was conducted by nine graduate students of De La Salle University,

Philippines together a professor under the course Teaching of Mathematics during the third term
of AY 2013-2014. Evaluation of the microteaching was grounded on the different principles
delineated in productive pedagogies. (You may just put this in the methodology. Intro parts are
more on setting the stage, and the details will be in the context part of the methodology.)

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Although some would argue that there is no best way to teach a subject than a method
that works (why do you say so?), mathematics educators are still faced with the challenge of a

Page 3 of 22
particular teaching method (really?) that would elicit the best result (though particular lessons
may be presented by espousing an optimal strategy… just my thought.) Improving the quality of
mathematics instruction across classrooms, schools, and broader educational jurisdictions is a
pressing issue for both researchers and practitioners. School leaders in a number of countries are
under increasing pressure to improve student learning opportunities in mathematics (Even &
Ball, 2010).(You see, this statement is research-based. What do you gather from this?
Suggestion: In this regard, however, the authors of this paper believe that these opportunities are
still contingent to different factors in the context of the classroom – such as student abilities,
school facilities, teacher competencies, and even the epistemological orientations of specific
mathematical organizations.)

The teaching and learning of mathematics is a politically charged arena. (Is this your
idea?) Strong feelings exist in the debate on how “best” to teach mathematics in K–12 schools,
feelings that are linked to varying perceptions about the nature of mathematics (Dossey, 1992).
(Is this referring to ‘our’ K-12? If not, relate it with ours. It’s just play of words, in this case.) But
for the purpose of this study, the researchers planned a teaching-learning process for the lesson
which combined two diametrically opposed methods of instruction – inductive and deductive
method. Inductive methods of instruction emphasize that students learn by discovery where a
minimal amount of teacher lecture and explanations is involved. On the other hand, in deductive
teaching, the teacher explains each fact, concept and generalization so that meaningful learning
may occur (Ediger, M. 2003) (I find this explanation still lacking). It is the teacher’s
responsibility to understand the delicate balance between the two, that is, seeing the conditions
that must be present to decide which one to be employed during the course of instruction. (Is
there no study that makes use of inductive-deductive approach?)

Embarking on the emergence of social constructivism which is the main driving force
behind notable mathematical reforms in many countries (Forman, 2003), the researchers wanted
an instruction that would be engaging to the students and where the learners can work in groups
or teams to help each other learn in an environment characterized by strong motivation and
smooth (I’m not so comfortable with this word in this context.) interpersonal interactions. This is
in keeping with NCTM’s (2000) (Can you just replace it with the K-12 curriculum provisions, if
it has? The NCTM’s 2000 document is already being ditched nowadays even by the Americans
themselves.) emphasis on the social interplay in mathematics instruction. Students’
understanding of mathematical ideas can be built throughout their school years if they actively
engage in tasks and experiences designed to deepen and connect their knowledge. Learning with
understanding can be further enhanced by classroom interactions, as students propose
mathematical ideas and conjectures, learn to evaluate their own thinking and that of others, and
develop mathematical reasoning skills. Classroom discourse and social interaction can be used to
promote the recognition of connections among ideas and the reorganization of knowledge.

Mathematics education researchers are well positioned to investigate the improvement of

the quality of instruction at scale. Over the past 20 years, research in mathematics education and

Page 4 of 22
related fields has made considerable progress in documenting learning progressions in specific
mathematical domains (Carpenter, Fennema, Franke, Levi, & Empson, 1999; Lehrer & Lesh,
2003) and in identifying a common set of learning goals that focus on enduring understandings
of central mathematical ideas (Kilpatrick, Swafford, & Findell, 2001). Recent research efforts
have also delineated a set of instructional practices that support students’ development of these
mathematical ideas (Franke, Kazemi, & Battey, 2007; National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics, 2000).

The mathematics education research community has also learned a great deal about
professional development that supports teachers’ development of practices aimed at ambitious
learning goals for students (Ball, Sleep, Boerst, & Bass, 2009; Kazemi & Hubbard, 2008;
Lampert, Beasley, Ghousseini, Kazemi, & Franke, 2010). One such move with increasing
popularity to academic community is what we know today as lesson study that originated from
Japan.

Lesson study: Focus and Features

Lesson study, a translation of the Japanese words jugyou (instruction or lesson) and
kenkyuu (research or study) is a professional development approach that is continuously growing
in popularity among educators nowadays. (Lewis, Perry & Murata, 2006).

This phenomenon features a unique style of teacher collaboration where a group of

teachers will work hand-in-hand to accomplish a cycle of lesson study. They create and critique a
lesson plan, then one of the teachers will conduct it while the others would observe. They will
then convene again to evaluate the teaching, to reflect on the practice and consolidate observed
student responses. A re-planning and reimplementation of the lesson then follows (Sarkar Arani,
Fukuya & Lassegard, 2010). (The re-planning and re-implementation does not happen all the
time.)

In detail, lesson study involves a cycle with four key features (Lewis, Perry & Murata,
2006). The first phase is the study of curriculum and formulation of goals. In an accountability
testing conducted by Yarema (2010), the participating teachers conducted a pre-test to students at
the beginning of the school year to determine the topic(s) with the highest and lowest
achievement for each individual students and each class that they taught. From here, they
identified their research topic, analyzed textbooks to be used as references, read articles about
students’ understanding of the content, and discussed the lessons with the university professors
housed in the same mathematics and teacher education departments. (Why highlight this
accountability testing by Yarema?) Planning the lesson then commences, where the teachers are
expected to enumerate the objectives of the lesson and develop the research lesson. They will
write an “instructional plan that includes long term goals, anticipated student thinking, data
collection plan, model of learning trajectory and rationale for chose approach” (Lewis, Perry &

Page 5 of 22
Murata, 2006, p. 4). One member of the team will then carry out the third phase, which is to
conduct the lesson study while the others will observe to collect the data. Reflection, or the fourth
phase where a formal colloquium in which observers will share the data collected from the
lesson, and use the data to clarify student learning, disciplinary content, lesson and unit design
and broader issues in teaching-learning. The cycle will be documented to be used for the
replanning of the lesson.

How lesson study worked for schools around the world

Educators from all around the world have begun to consider lesson study in developing a
new culture for promoting learning communities at their schools. Countries such as Singapore,
Iran, Germany, Indonesia, and China (Sarkar Arani, Fukaya & Lassegard, 2010) have developed
their own perspectives on lesson study based on their indigenous school cultures, educational
context and needs. Fang & Lee (cited in Cheng & Yee, 2012) shares that many Asian countries
have been adapting the lesson study, but it is given different names such as learning study (Hong
Kong) and action education (China).

Cheng & Yee (2012) presented a case of lesson study in Singapore where it seeks to
identify what the teachers learned as the result of their experience in one lesson study cycle. It
was revealed in one focused group interview that the planning and critiquing of daily lessons was
done individually. Observing a lesson carried out in a classroom and critiquing of lessons with
colleagues, furthermore, allowed them to formulate hypotheses about students’ thinking during
lesson planning. The observation, on the other hand, gives them the opportunity to test and verify
their hypotheses. The group also said that the experience brought by the lesson study inspired
them to try new approaches and activities for the class, and provided them the opportunity to
evaluate and improvise the tasks.

Even in the United States, lesson study has becoming more and more popular. Hiebert
and Stigler (2000), proposed a research and development system for improving teaching that is
based on the Japanese process of lesson study. However, a gap between the beliefs in the reform
and retaining traditional practice was still evident after the implementation of a video study,
which aimed to examine the influence of the reform recommendations on classroom practice.
Ninety-five percent (95%) of the US teachers expressed awareness about the current ideas in
mathematics teaching, but certain practices shown in the video study do not show evidence that
they are implementing these in their classrooms. One indicator showed that in teaching
multiplication of polynomials, US teachers just simply state the rules of adding and subtracting
exponents rather than explain why it works. Moreover, the video study also revealed that no
instances of working through proofs or reasoning deductively were shown.

Five years later, however, positive feedback on the adaptation of lesson study in the US
started to get published (Rock & Wilson, 2005, Lewis, Perry, Hurd & O’Connell, 2006). One
notable article was written by Lewis, Perry and Hurd (2009) where a successful adaptation in the

Page 6 of 22
US school district was cited. It showed how teachers took advantage of the lesson study to
develop their competence in teaching Mathematics, as well as build their foundations on the said
subject. They also realized their capacity for cooperative work and the quality of their teaching
materials.

(Why not include something from the Philippines? There are already a lot of papers that
talk about introducing lesson study in the Philippines, like that of Ulep. Also, there are already a
lot of papers about lesson study in southeast asia like Malaysia and Thailand; but of course, I
don’t expect you to include it in this paper at this point in time.)

Why pursue lesson study?

Cheng and Yee (2012) believe that lesson study is a kind of professional development
because it encourages teachers to work collaborate with each other (I think something’s missing
here; not a complete sentence). Since different countries may have varying teaching cultures, it is
also important to note that opening up classrooms for observation and accepting criticisms are
sometimes regarded as a means of evaluating the teacher, which results to teachers having
conflicting feelings about engaging in lesson study (Sarkar Arani, Fukaya & Lassegard, 2010).
(Yes, this is true. But what we did in our lesson study did not involve anyone from another
culture. Or, in the original cited article, was the thing on “different countries” really stated, or
was it your idea?) However, Lieberman (2009, cited in Cheng & Yee, 2012) argues that teachers
would learn about their profession if they are open to scrutiny, and if they would choose to think
critically about their lesson plans. Yarema (2010) further agrees and cites that lesson study gives
an avenue for teachers to ask each other about their teaching practices, thus, providing everybody
in the group a chance to hear teachers’ thinking and to offer suggestions. (Please re-check this
source. I want to know if this paper by Yarema is based on research, or just his commentaries.
It’s always important to choose what you cite. We have to avoid citing articles that are merely
commentaries.)

Despite the promise presented in different articles (See, it should be studies/research

rather than articles that may just be glorified essays.) about the successful implementation of
lesson study, the challenge remains that lesson study demands a lot of time for the preparation of
the lesson and critiquing, not to mention the amount of commitment that teachers have to put for
the activity. This suggests that educational institutions must develop a habit of formulating time
tables to check for the teachers’ common time. However, the greater the number of teachers, the
more difficult it would be to find a common time for convening. It is also important that the
support of the administrators and government be given so that teachers will have the much
needed resources to implement lesson study successfully. (Do you think this paragraph is needed
in this part of the paper?)

Page 7 of 22
The Philippines K-12 and K-12 Math Curriculum

Prior to implementation of K-12 in the Philippines, the country was the sole country in
Asia that has an education composed of 10 levels (Just describe the levels in years, but make the
description clear): 6 elementary levels and 4 high school levels. Then DepEd (this
abbreviation/truncation must be introduced in the earlier part of the paper. Did you?) decided to
add 2 years to High School Education and give more strict needs and focus to the Preschool
Education (Yap, 2011).

Based on the DepEd, the general goals of K-12 are to remove the errands and flaws of the
curriculum and give students preparations to reach the higher quality education, have sufficient
yet efficient skills for them to face labour at least 18 years old and meet international standards
in terms of education. According to the result of the 2008 FLEMMS (Functional Literacy,
Education and Mass Media Survey) (What kind of survey is this? Is this a national/international
survey?), 19% of the elementary graduates lack sufficiency in functional literacy skills, which
are reading, writing, computing and comprehending. In terms of curriculum, “General
Education” subjects, which were minor courses in college level, were already added in the high
school curriculum for the sake of preparation for higher-level education (Yap, 2011).

In terms of comparing the old curriculum and the K-12 curriculum, the Basic Education
Program in the Philippines’ focus is to nurture basic skills of the students, while in K-12, its
focus is to maximize the skills of the students, such as creativity and problem solving, critical
thinking, mastery towards mathematical competencies and discovery in concepts (The K to 12
Basic Education Program, 2012).

Based on the Conceptual Framework of Mathematics Education in K-12 on the K to 12

Toolkit, the main goal of the curriculum is to strengthen and focus on problem solving and
critical thinking skills of the students. The content areas in the curriculum are “Numbers and
Number Sense, Geometry, Patterns and Algebra, Measurement and Statistics and Probability”.
The skills and processes to be developed are “Knowing and Understanding, Estimating,
Computing and Solving, Visualizing and Modelling, Representing and Communicating,
Conjecturing, Reasoning, Proving and Decision Making and Applying and Connecting” (K to 12
Toolkit, 2012).

In terms of the topics in Grade 7 Mathematics, the K to 12 Mathematics Curriculum

Guide implicated that the primary lessons are numbers and number sense, measurement, patterns
and algebra, geometry and statistics and probability. The numbers and number sense serve as
first lessons in Grade 7 Mathematics. The concepts covered are sets and real number system. (K
to 12 Mathematics Curriculum Guide (Grade 1 to Grade 10) page 8, 2013).

(I think you have to shorten your discussion on K-12. Be brief but precise. Just include the
necessary information, especially for the international audience. It’s quite lengthy, I think.)

Page 8 of 22
Sets as First Lesson

Before the implementation of K-12 in the Philippines, the Philippines suffered in terms
of ranking and ratings in TIMSS and NAT (The international readers do not know NAT, let
alone you did not indicate its full meaning). K-12 was implemented since 2012 in order to
improve the education equality and the curriculum, which can bring positive changes to the
students in terms of literacy skills in all subjects. (Again, too much info on K-12. Just include
what’s necessary. Avoid redundancy) In Grade 7 Mathematics, the researchers believe that sets
must be the first topic because it serves as the foundation and language of mathematics (This
idea was not established well, especially in the beginning of the paper.). It also enables the
students to understand different branches of mathematics with the help of the concepts of sets.
(How sure are you about this statement?)

Sets are under the first topic which is numbers and number sense (page 8 of which
document?). According to an online messaging interview with Dr. Limjap (See Appendix), sets
serve as the? language of Mathematics that students should be able to learn before reaching
higher mathematics (Limjap, 2014). (This should have been made clear at the onset. Did you ask
her why? Is this something that is shared by mathematics educators?) The concepts of sets are
also applied in algebraic, geometric and proportional lessons. Based on the introduction part of
the article “Set Theory” written by Väänänen (2010), sets are covered with the following
algebraic concepts: relation, function, ordered pairs and Cartesian product. Aside from it, sets are
also known as the universal language in mathematics, which considers this as the basic core of
mathematics.

Based on the objectives of the K-12 Mathematics Curriculum Guide in Grade 7, the
students are expected to describe every key term in sets such as subsets, universal sets, well-
defined sets and null sets. Aside from it, cardinality and ordinality should be recognized by
Grade 7 students. The Venn diagram is one of the lessons that students in Grade 7 should
primarily know in order for them to understand the union, intersection and difference of the sets
and represent sets, subsets and set operations. Based on the conceptual framework, critical
thinking and problem solving should be properly based on the lesson. Aside from the lessons
stated above, the students should be able to solve problems that contain sets. (K to 12
Mathematics Curriculum Guide (Grade 1 to Grade 10), 2013).

Assessments and Methods of Teaching (You think you have to include this at this point of
your paper?)

Regarding the assessments, paper and pen assessments are the main assessments of the
students on the lesson depending on the test type. According to Dr. Limjap, problem solving and
proofs, which are based in real-world situations and applications, are the most suggestive type
that can enable the students to understand sets (Limjap, 2014). (Was this based on an interview

Page 9 of 22
with Dr. Limjap? Does she know you’re going to cite her? I think the interview you did was to
inform you during your lesson planning. It might be unfair to Dr. Limjap if you cite her
interview responses without her knowing it. In that case, you have to show her how you cited her
in this paper. )

On teaching methods, according to the introduction of the article, “Designing Educative

Curriculum Materials to Promote Teacher Learning”, educative curriculum materials, which are
materials used in K-12, promote teacher learning, which develops more knowledge skills that
can enable the teachers to solve problems made of new and real-life situations. On the “Teacher
Learning and Teacher Knowledge part”, teachers are required to have pedagogical content
knowledge (PCK) so the teachers would be able to master the topic and teach the concepts
clearly for the students to understand every topic well (Davis and Krajcik, 2005). (These are nice
info, but then again, just choose statements that are important for the idea that you want to
pursue in this paper. You don't have to be inclusive of all the nice ideas. Just be focused on your
central point.)

Productive Pedagogies (Please provide an information on how you made use of this notion
in this paper. At the moment, it seems like an artificial addition/insertion in your work.)

Productive Pedagogies developed out of a large commissioned research project funded by

Education Queensland from 1998 to 2000 (Lingard et al, 2001). This study was concerned with
ascertaining what features of school organizational capacity (Newmann and Associates, 1996)
encourage the pervasive practice of such pedagogies, and what external supports from the
various systemic levels encourage a particular professional learning community of teachers,
which in turn encourages productive pedagogies (Louis et al, 1996). The findings of the study
(Which study? Are you referring to the project in Queensland? Is Darling-Hammond a part of it?
How about Fullan? Sorry, I got lost.) suggests that in order to improve student outcomes from
schooling through improved classroom practices, there is a need to value teachers, their
knowledge and ongoing learning (Darling-Hammond, 2000) as central to a school’s
organizational capacity, as well as being a central rationale for systemic infrastructural support
for schools (Fullan, 2001). The productive pedagogy model builds upon the authentic pedagogy
research in extending considerations to social as well as intellectual outcomes of schooling
(Lingard et al, 2003).

Furthermore, Lingard et al (2003) mentioned in their article that this reform model seeks
to provide a lens through which educators can see existing teaching practices, with a view to
reconceptualising them in ways that increase the academic and social outcomes for all students.
The model consists of twenty elements, all of which are potentially observable within any
classroom irrespective of subject area or age level.

Page 10 of 22
 In 2010, Alsharif and Atweh conducted a research about the implementation of the
Productive Pedagogies into teaching practice. They share that Productive Pedagogies is a
framework with 4 categories namely Intellectual Quality, Connectedness, Supportive Classroom
Environment and Recognition of difference, which are designed to exhibit effective teaching the
in class (p.2).

Because teaching becomes operative through this framework, this allows the teacher to
promote activities that would enhance students’ profound understanding and engagement to
learning (Atweh, 2011). It establishes essential interaction between the teacher and the students.
Furthermore, the Productive Pedagogies can help the teacher make relevant reflections about his
practice of conducting the lessons as well as it allows the teacher and the classroom observer to
generate a vital discussion of the instruction needed to be steered in the classroom. With this, the
framework offers realistic feedback to teachers that will aid them in upholding quality learning in
the classroom. (Atweh, 2011).

METHODOLOGY

(I think you should also include the set-up in class. How were you formed as a group that
became the authors of this paper?)

Prior to the implementation of the lesson, the group was introduced to the basic idea of
lesson study through a video documentary (Only?) presented in class. The researchers were
oriented on the essential of a lesson study, together with its advantages. In line with the goal of
conducting a lesson study, the group followed certain steps to achieve a unified effort in
collaborative lesson study, which is patterned to Stigler and Hiebert’s (1999) suggested
procedures. However, due to time constraints, the group was not able to revise and re-teach the
lesson (Your goal was to only have one cycle of the lesson, because of the limitations of time in
our course), as well as to critique and reflect on it (You were able to critique and reflect on the
lesson, right?).

1. Definition of a problem

In selecting the topic of the lesson study, the group considered a topic that was not yet
taught to the students. After some careful deliberations, the team decided to work on a
lesson to introduce sets because the nature of the topic is very conceptual. Its concept
paired with its entirely unique notions for operations may lead students into confusion if
not properly taught to them.

2. Plan the mathematics lesson

Three weeks before the teaching demo, the group met to talk about the objectives to be
presented in the lesson study. Only three out of the nine members of the team have

Page 11 of 22
 experienced teaching the lesson in the actual classroom, thus, the decisions about the
coverage of the lesson was based on the comments on how the said topic was delivered in
their respective classes.

The group grappled with the idea as to whether to include an activity due to time
constraint. To help them out with the decision, they sought for the opinion of their
professor. They were given the nod to make do of any activity they deemed would be
helpful in the teaching-learning process but with proper consideration of time.

The lesson was also trimmed down to fewer subtopics about set. The group decided that
the lesson should be limited to the introductory part only with time element taken into
account.

3. Teach and observe the lesson in the classroom

One member of the research team executed the lesson while the rest of the teachers
observed. (How did you select the teacher? How was the observation done? Who were
the observers? You made use of the productive pedagogies, right? Was there a division of
labor?)

4. Critique and reflectively discuss the lesson after classroom observations

Following the teaching demo, the class convened to discuss the lesson. First, the group
shared how they prepared for the lesson study. They also shared their own evaluation
about the outcome of the teaching demonstration. Members of the other groups were
assigned to take note of various aspects of the learning process and share it to the class
such as substantiation, application and utilization of a supportive environment,
connectedness to the world, recognition of differences and engagement of the students.

5. Share the results

The members of the group consolidated all the inputs into a research output which
describes the impact of lesson study in improving the lesson on sets. (So, this is what
you’re doing in this paper, right?)

Research Respondents and Locale

The researchers chose the students through purposive sampling method. A total of
eighteen students out of the twenty originally invited (no need for this) participated in the
microteaching. With the lesson to be conducted during summer, these students pledged their
availability at the set schedule. (Rephrase) As per class standing is concerned, the students are
considered homogeneously above average. (I think you can add some more information about
the participants… their school, how you have chosen them, etc.)

Page 12 of 22
 Guided by the researchers’ goal for a more authentic presentation of a lesson during the
microteaching???, they chose a topic which is a novelty to the learners in general. It is worth
noting that the school from where these students are enrolled two years ago has yet to implement
the spiral approach in their curriculum. Thus, the demonstration class albeit incoming Grade 9
students would have this lesson about set for the first time.

Presentation of the Lesson

The researchers focused on the teaching method which is the inductive-deductive

approach. According to Dr.Olenka Bilash a Professor at University of Alberta, “inductive
instruction makes use of student “noticing”. Instead of explaining a given concept and following
this explanation with examples, the teacher presents students with many examples showing how
the concept is used.” On the other hand, the deductive way of teaching is more of a teacher-
centered approach. This means that the teacher gives the student the new concept, explains it and
let the students practice the new concept. (Some parts of this paragraph may be used in the RRL)

In line with this, the researchers noticed that using both methods can help the students to
better understand the concept.

The teacher has an excellent knowledge about the topic and is well prepared. (This should
always be the case.) The mathematics classes are allotted 6o minutes per day. In this study, the
researchers will try to evaluate whether the methods used by the teacher are effective for the
students to understand how to determine a Set.

The teacher grouped the students into three and handed them objects in which they will
sort it in whatever way they want. Group 1 and 3, sorted the objects according to color. Group 2,
sorted the objects according to its functions.

T: How did you group your things? (referring to Group 2)

S: these objects are used for writing.

T: Are these used for writing?

S: We use this to write something.

T: Okay so this is where we write, we can classify this group as writing materials.

(No need for this dialogues. You just have to describe. You usually make use of these
kinds of dialogues in the findings/evidence parts. At this point, you are just describing what you
did, your methodology.)

Page 13 of 22
 The teacher was able to address the functions of the objects. She then proceeded with the
other group asking the same question but got a different explanation on how they sorted the
objects.

T: I see you grouped the t-shirt, the alcohol, the La Salle ID and the green folder.

What is your basis on doing that?

S: We sort them by colors.

T: What’s the color of these objects?

S: They are all green. (No need. Just describe.)

The teacher then wrote on the board how the students grouped the objects. In that
manner, the whole class can see how each group sorted the objects. She then tried to let the
students evaluate those observations by asking them “what is common with the objects?”. She
then introduced the topic by stating that “there are different ways to classify these objects and in
Mathematics, collectively we call these objects ‘Set’”. They can name the grouped objects
according to its functions or by its appearance. She then defined Set as:

“a well-defined collection or group of objects”

In order for the students to understand whether the collection or the grouping is well-
defined, the teacher introduced another activity “The Boat is sinking”. The students grouped
themselves according to the following criteria: birth month, city of residence, height, hair color,
body build and sex appeal. After the activity, the teacher than asked the students which of those
grouping or classification they were sure that they were a member. The teacher got the following
answers: birth month, city of residence and hair color. The students also were able to figure out
what grouping they were not sure of, those are: height, body build and sex appeal. The teacher
then asked the students what is a ‘well-defined set’, a student answered that “a well-defined set
should be ‘clear’ and ‘specific’”. She then gave the formal definition of set which is “a set is
well-defined is there is no question about whether or not an object belongs to it.”

After giving more examples, she then introduced the methods of writing sets, namely:
The Roster Method and the Rule Method. Since the students have no idea on how to write a set,
the teacher showed that in order to determine a set, they need to use a variable, name the
elements and put braces.

Roster Method:

Set of the days in a weel:

D = {Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday}

Page 14 of 22
 Is Monday Є D? YES

Rule Method:

{x | x is a day of the week}

X such that is a day of the week.

The students were able to generalize the idea on what a set is and how to classify them.
For their last example the teacher asked the students to identify the elements of ‘the set of
consonants in the word mathematics’. A student was able to write the Rooster Method for this set
but the teacher then asked:

T: but ‘m’ appeared twice, so should we write it two times also?

Student B: we should put an exponent.

T: do we write ‘m2’? or just ‘m’? or another ‘m’?

Student C: No, because they are the same element.

It was surprising to know how students used their prior knowledge of exponents. Given
all the activities, it is an opportunity for the teacher to correct the students’ misconceptions about
using an exponent.

After the lesson, we can say that all objectives are met. The students were able to
distinguish a well-defined from a not well-defined set, they were able to define a set using roster
and rule method and lastly, they were able to write a set using the proper notation.

(Just make a BRIEF DESCRiPTION. I know that this can be hard as you want to say
everything. But this is one talent that you have to develop in writing. Be precise, concise, and
brief.)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

(In this section, this is where you need to put the appropriate evidences.)

After conducting lesson study to the grade 8 students of Sta.Clara Parish School, the
researchers consolidated the points of the four groups of observers (this set-up should be
explained well at the onset) that provided the comments as well as suggestions on the strategies
used by the teacher to present the concept of sets to students. Each group was assigned to base
their commentaries and points for improvements from each category stated in the Productive
Pedagogies framework (Atweh, 2009) so as to provide relevant accounts on how effective

Page 15 of 22
teaching should be delivered in the class. The dimensions include Intellectual Quality,
Connectedness, Supportive Classroom Environment and Recognition of Differences.

Intellectual Quality

The observers affirmed the teacher execution of the lesson in general. They underscored
several points to improve the delivery of the lesson with respect to this dimension. One of them
noted that:

I think that it would be better if you (pertaining to the teacher) asked the students to give
their own well-defined set. I also think that during the first activity which is grouping of
the objects, you should have let the students to present their work to the whole class and
let them explain on why they group the objects and with that you let the students to
reason out whether they agree or disagree on the said groupings.

More specifically, another observer from this group pointed out that:

In order to check whether the students understood the concept of a well-defined set or
not, the teacher should have solicited students own examples. (Another is that) the rules
on how to write the elements of the set were not clearly explained to the students.
Perhaps, it would be good to note and emphasize that order is not important when
writing the elements of the set.

The observers also mentioned the activity Think-Pair-Share allowed the students to
interact more with each other. (Expound more. Make use of your RRL to elaborate your
argument. Why do you say that the statements given above talk about intellectual quality? Make
the connection clear and explicit.)

Connectedness

The connection between the teacher and the students had been identified by the observers.
They highlighted that the connection was evident because the teacher showed a pleasant spirit
when she delivered the lesson. (Is it so? What’s the connection?)

In terms of giving of examples to students on the concept of sets, the observers

mentioned that there was hierarchy. (Why? What’s your evidence for this? Give specific
example/s. You may use the dialogues spoken by the participants during the class.) The teacher
was able to stretch the examples from easy to complicated ones. (This is where you need to show
examples.) On the other hand, the group emphasized that the teacher should have used the same
examples she presented on the activities in introducing the ways of writing a set. They also liked
the fact that the teacher was able to show connection of sets to the past presidents of the
Philippines and to the city of residences.

Page 16 of 22
 The observers also asserted that the students were not as passive as what the teacher had
thought first because the students were actually conversing and discussing the topic within their
groups.

Another observer from the group also suggested a point with regards to the connections
of the solutions. His comment was as follows:

Maybe you could ask the students to write the answer on the board to see the variety of
solutions and to check whether their solution is similar to others or not.

(And so…. ? What do you gather from this statement?)

Supportive Classroom Environment

As what they had observed, the teacher is not authoritative and not-demanding. Her tone
of delivering the concepts was good. However one pointed out that the teacher lacked in giving
affirmation to the answers of students. (Expound. You may write the actual words that one of
observers said. Then do a commentary.)

Recognition of Differences

One of observers assigned to this category stated:

There were activities made by the teacher that contributes to the recognition of
differences such as the Boat is Sinking. The activity had helped students to recognize
more of themselves. Maybe, next time, try to consider including all the students in the
activity instead of just getting representatives from the class.

The group also suggested to the teacher that it would be better to allow the students to
decide on how to be grouped during the first phase of the lesson and perhaps followed up on the
reason for the way they had grouped themselves. Similarly, the teacher could have asked the
students if they agree on the way the objects are grouped.

(You may also use dialogues from student/student or student/teacher interaction during
the actual class to show evidences… and not only the quotes from the participants.)

RECOMMENDATIONS

There are a number of realizations in the completion of this study. The effectiveness of the
method employed in the instruction was not of much concern to the observers and evaluators.
(So, what was the main concern of the observers and evaluators? What’s the difference between
observers and evaluators?) By and large, the delivery was lauded by the majority of the observers

Page 17 of 22
and there was no hint of other methods the lesson could have been delivered. However, a number
of recommendations was raised and were worth reflecting by every teacher notably:

1. More is less. In the case of the lesson about sets, the teacher should provide a more
coherent set of activities that do not present too many examples, thereby making the
lesson simpler and focused;
2. Maximum student participation. Students cannot be expected to participate in the same
way or rate but it is the teacher’s task to create an environment in which all participants
have the opportunity to learn and in which the class explores issues and ideas in depth,
from a variety of viewpoints. For some students who were not part of the presenting
group, they may be asked for their opinions about the activity that transpired or inputs to
check whether what they have somehow learned out of the observation.
3. Let the students decide. A study reveals that empowering students positively affects their
well-being, behavior and values, academic achievement, teachers, and understanding of
democracy (Kohn, 1993). During group activities, the teacher could leave the choice to
students the manner of how they wish to be grouped.
4. Lesson study presents a big help in the improvement of instruction. Although some
educators may take it as an attack to their teaching competencies, it should be welcomed
by all teachers whose primary concern is to affect learning to students.

FINAL REMARKS

In essence, lesson study promotes interactions among members within a community of

mathematics educators opening an avenue for teachers to explicitly think about their views,
influences on instructional choices, and possible changes in practice. Findings from this study
indicate that engagement in lesson study poses a promise to enhance the teaching of mathematics
among teachers. Hence, its potential for use by teachers to develop and enhance the teaching and
learning of mathematics at all levels appears worthy of further investigation.

It is also worth mentioning that lesson studies can be well-complemented with other
professional development models such as the concept of productive pedagogies in this case. The
two models can work hand-in-hand to eventually create a pedagogy where learning is of utmost
concern.

You may just combine the final remarks and the recommendations as just one section,
which is “Conclusion” or “Concluding remarks”. Note that this concluding remarks might still be
modified based on how you modify the organization/body of this paper.

REFERENCES

Alsharif and Atweh (2010). Gaps in Understanding and Implementing Connectedness in

Mathematics Teaching by Saudi Student Teachers (Incomplete citation.)

Page 18 of 22
Atweh (2011). Beyond Student Centred Learning Towards Educative Pedagogies. (Incomplete
citation.)
Ball, D. L., Sleep, L., Boerst, T., & Bass, H. (2009). Combining the development of practice and
the practice of development in teacher education. Elementary School Journal, 109(5),
458-474.
Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Franke, M. L., Levi, L., & Empson, S. B. (1999). Children's
mathematics: Cognitively guided instruction. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Cheng, L. & Pee, L. (2012). A Singaporean case of lesson study. The Mathematics Educator,
21(2), pp. 34 – 57.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000) Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: a review of state
policy evidence, Education Policy Archives, 8(1), pp. 1-45.
Davis, E. and Krajcik, J. (2005) Designing Educative Curriculum Materials to Promote Teacher
Learning. Educational Researcher, Vol. 34, No.3, pp.3-14.
Dogan-Dunlap, Hamide (2006). International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science &
Technology, v37 n4 p401-410.
Dossey, J. (1992). The nature of mathematics: Its role and its influence. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.),
Handbook of research in mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 39–48). New York:
Macmillan.
Ediger, M. & Rao, DM (2003) Teaching Mathematics in Elementary Schools. Daya Ganj, New
Delhi, India: Discovery Publishing House.
Even, R., & Ball, D. L. (Eds.). (2010). The professional education and development of teachers
of mathematics: The 15th ICMI study. New York: Springer.
Forman, E. A. (2003). A sociocultural approach to mathematics reform: Speaking, inscribing,
and doing mathematics within communities of practice. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, &
D. Schifter (Eds.). A research companion to Principles and Standards for School
Mathematics (pp. 333–352). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Franke, M. L., Kazemi, E., & Battey, D. (2007). Mathematics teaching and classroom practice.
In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and
learning (pp. 225-256). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Fullan, M. (2001) Leading in a Culture of Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hiebert, J. & Stigler, J. (2000). A proposal for improving classroom teaching: lessons from the
TIMSS video study. The Elementary School Journal, 101 (1), pp. 3 – 20.
Kazemi, E., & Hubbard, A. (2008). New directions for the design and study of professional
development: Attending to the coevolution of teachers’ participation across contexts.
Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 428-441.
Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn
mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Kohn, Alfie. (1993) Phi Delta Kappan, v75 n1 p8-16,18-21
K To 12 Toolkit: Resource Guide for Teacher Educators, School Administrators and Teachers
(2012) SEAMEO INNOTECH. Retrieved from
http://www.gov.ph/downloads/2012/201209-K-to-12-Toolkit.pdf on April 8, 2014
K to 12 Basic Education Mathematics ( Grade 1 to Grade 10) (2013) Department of Education,
DepEd Complex, Meralco Avenue, Pasig City.

Page 19 of 22
Lampert, M., Beasley, H., Ghousseini, H., Kazemi, E., & Franke, M. L. (2010). Using designed
instructional activities to enable novices to manage ambitious mathematics teaching. In
M. K. Stein & L. Kucan (Eds.), Instructional explanations in the disciplines (pp. 129-
141). New York: Springer.
Lehrer, R., & Lesh, R. (2003). Mathematical learning. In W. Reynolds & G. Miller (Eds.),
Comprehensive handbook of psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 357-391). New York: John Wiley.
Lewis, C., Perry, R. & Murata, A. (2006). How should research contribute to instructional
improvement? The case of lesson study. Educational Researcher, 35 (3), pp. 3 – 14.
Lewis, C., Perry, R. & Hurd, J. (2009). What is successful adaptation of lesson study in the US?
Journal of Educational Change, 10, pp. 365 – 391.
Lewis, C., Perry, R., Hurd, J. & O’Connell, M. P. (2006). Lesson study comes of age in North
America. Phi Delta Kappan, 88, 273 – 281.
Limjap, A. (2014) Interview Questions about Sets as the First Topic in Grade 7 Math. *See
Appendix
Lingard, B., Ladwig, J., Mills, M., Bahr, M., Chant, D., Warry, M., Ailwood, J., Capeness, R.,
Christie, P., Gore, J., Hayes, D., & Luke, A. (2001) The Queensland School Reform
Longitudinal Study. Brisbane: Education Queensland.
Lingard, B., Ladwig, J., Mills, M. & Christie, P. (2003) Leading Learning: making hope
practical in schools. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Louis, K., Kruse, D. & Marks, H.M. (1996) Schoolwide Professional Community, in F.
Newmann & Associates (Eds) Authentic Acievement Restructuring Scoohls for
Intellectual Quality, pp. 179-203. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school
mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
Newmann, F. & Associates (1996) Authentic Achievement Restructuring Schools for Intellectual
Quality. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
O’Brien, M. (n.d.). How to teach set theory to grade 6. Retrieved March 28, 2014 from
http://www.ehow.com/how_12052373_teach-set-theory-grade-6.html
Rock, T. & Wilson, C. (2005). Improving teaching through lesson study. Teacher Education
Quarterly. 32(1), 77 – 92.
Sarkar Arani, M., Fukaya, K. & Lassegard, J. (2010). Lesson study as professional culture in
Japanese schools: an historical perspective on elementary classroom practices.
Stigler, J. & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap. New York, NY: The Free Press.
The K to 12 Basic Education Program(2012) Don Bosco Press. Retrieved from
http://www.donboscopress.ph/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/DepEd-K12-Basic-
Education.pdf since April 9, 2014
Väänänen, J. (2010) Set Theory. University of Amsterdam. Retrieved from
http://staff.science.uva.nl/~ssimon/indjournal/pdf/vaananen.pdf since April 8, 2014
Yap, R. H. (2011) K to 12: The Key to Quality Education. SEPO Policy Brief.
Retrieved from http://www.senate.gov.ph/publications/PB%202011-02%20-
%20K%20to%2012%20The%20Key%20to%20Quality.pdf since April 10,2014.

Page 20 of 22
Yarema, C. (2010). Mathematics teachers’ views of accountability testing revealed through
lesson study. MTED, 12(1) pp. 3 – 18 (What is MTED?)

APPENDIX

Interview Questions about Sets as the First Topic in Grade 7 Math

1.) Why are sets introduced as its first topic in Grade 7 Math Curriculum?
If math is the language of science, set theory is the language of mathematics. It is just logical
that students learn the language first before the learn higher level mathematics. Whatever system
we refer to, be it algebraic system, geometric system or propositional system, discussions are
made using the concept of sets. Proficiency in sets is necessary to acquire proficiency in higher
mathematics.

Page 21 of 22
2.) What are the concepts and skills required to master when it comes to Grade 7 students?
As indicated in the K to 12 Curriculum Guide for Mathematics, Grade 7 students should be able
to demonstrate understanding of key concepts of sets by formulating intellectually challenging
situations on sets and solve them using various strategies. They should be able to describe and
illustrate sets and the different types of sets, set operations, Venn diagram, and solve problems.

3.) How can sets be implemented properly to the classroom especially in public schools in the
Philippines?
The teacher should start from concrete illustration of sets and the operations and slowly move to
the abstract concepts. Problems should be contextualized.

4.) What assessments can be implemented in sets for the Grade 7 students?
Paper and pencil test on concepts and on application of the set concepts on real life situations is
the best assessment of students' understanding of sets.

5.) What are the advantages of sets to the students' learning?

The concept of sets help students classify elements, categorize, generalize and synthesize. They
have to identify common characteristics and articulate it. They acquire the discipline of explicitly
telling which elements belong and do not belong to a certain classification.

6.) What are the applications of sets?

As I mentioned in 1) the language of sets is used in any branch of mathematics. Think of any
mathematical system and you have to understand the concept of sets to be able to describe,
understand and apply it fully.

7.) Why do students need to study sets during Grade 7 in High School?
As I mentioned in 1) as a language of mathematics, students have to learn it. Otherwise, they will
not be able to understand the concept and the mathematical system.

Page 22 of 22