Development and Validation of Lesson Plan on Food Chain

and Food Web through Lesson Study Approach

Wilma Ang, Eric Laurence Gandia, Paul John Intal, Joebelle Ramirez
CGSTER, Philippine Normal University-Manila

Abstract
The study aimed to follow the lesson study approach originated in Japan in
developing a constructivist lesson plan on food chain and food web for grade 8 that was
structured using the 7Es strategy. It utilized the eight-step process employed by
Japanese teachers for collaborative lesson study (Stigler & Hiebert, 1999) hence the
lesson plan undergone two phases of development and validation process which
employed various participants and respondents. The data gathered were both
quantitative and qualitative which were obtained during the demonstration teaching
through evaluation rubric and observation guide that constitutes respondents’
observations and personal reflections on the lesson.
The results shown that after the second phase, evaluation rubric revealed that all
items can be interpreted as “very acceptable” thus the lesson plan is generally “very
acceptable”. Meanwhile, positive observations were evident from the qualitative data
although respondents commented some points for further improvement. Thus this study
recommends that grade 8 teachers may already utilize the lesson plan in teaching their
students and may continue the cycle of the lesson study with their colleagues thus
further refining it.

Keywords: lesson study, food chain, 7Es, constructivism

Introduction
The Philippines throughout the history strive for increasing the quality of science
education since the country consistently lags behind among other nations in the Third

1
International Mathematics and Science Survey (TIMSS) in various years (Imam, 2014).
With this, education leaders and teachers aimed for improving science education and
urged for individual and collective efforts to enhance the teaching and learning process.
Other countries before taking the top spots in many international assessments
have undergone different changes and improvements in their educational system
particularly teaching and learning process. Rock and Wilson (2005) noted that many
educational scholars deemed that educational reform should focus on providing
teachers with opportunities and encourage them to have an on-going improvement of
pedagogical process. Stigler and Hiebert (1999) also stated that “it is teaching, not
teachers, that must be changed”. Thus, the pedagogy of teachers should be
continuously improved to have a quality learning process thus producing quality
learners. Consequently, this may result to gradual but significant advancement of
science education in the country.
In this connection, the present study aimed to follow the lesson study inquiry
model to develop a lesson plan in science. Lesson study or ​jugyoukenkyu ​is a teacher
professional development that originated and used extensively in Japan (Rock and
Wilson, 2005). It uses a collaborative approach to study classroom lessons and initiate
positive change for instructional practice and student learning. It is a cycle in which
teachers formulate goals for student learning and long learning development, develop
“research” lessons to accomplish those goals; implement the lessons/document
observations on lesson implementation; discuss the pieces of evidence gathered during
the lesson implementation and use them to improved the lesson; and teach and study
the lesson again to further refine it.
Lewis (2000) believed that through lesson study, Japan’s teachers were able to
successfully shift their approach to teaching science from teaching as telling to teaching
for understanding. In such way, constructivism approach should also be employed in
developing a lesson plan. Lesson plan should be student-centered and thus teachers
may utilize 7Es in their teaching. 7Es strategy has seven steps namely: Elicit, Engage,
Explore, Explain, Elaborate, Evaluate and Extend.

2
Methodology
This study utilized mixed method design in which qualitative approach was used
to gain an in-depth insight of the observations and reflections of the respondents in the
lesson study process gathered through observation guide while quantitative approach
was employed for the researchers to gauge the level of the lesson plan in terms of its
parts and various criteria set in the evaluation rubric utilized.
This study adapted the eight-step process employed by Japanese teachers for
collaborative lesson study (Stigler & Hiebert, 1999); resulting to two phases of validation
process. This was done to ensure more valid and reliable lesson plan developed. The
process is summarized by figure 1 below.

​Figure 1. ​Lesson study process utilized in the research

3
 The participants of this research were different for the two phases of the lesson
study process. On the first phase, participants who served as the students of
teacher-researcher were graduate students of Philippine Normal University taking
Masters Degree under the science education cluster. The respondents who served as
the knowledgeable other and observer were the same with the participants. On the
other hand, after the first revision of the lesson it was implemented to a private school
where the teacher-researcher is presently teaching and on that phase, the students for
the lesson study were grade 8 students while the observer was a grade 8 teacher and
the knowledgeable other was a master teacher in biology.
The research methodology is developmental in nature wherein the revisions and
the succeeding procedures were done after and were based on every evaluation of the
lesson. On the other hand, the selected lesson in this research was Food Chain and
Food Web as specified in the K-12 Curriculum Guide for Grade 8. The lesson was
planned following the 7E’s cycle. Refer to the appendix for the copy of the lesson plan.
There are four key persons in the lesson study: Facilitator, Teacher-Implementer,
Observer and Knowledgeable other. Tasks and guidelines in implementing lesson study
were given thus strictly following those throughout the research process.
The instruments used were the evaluation rubric and the observation guide. The
evaluation rubric was used to rate the lesson plan through a five-point and three-point
scale. Refer to the appendix for the evaluation rubric. The results of the evaluation were
analyzed through weighted mean and were interpreted using the table below.

Table 1
Evaluation rubric interpretation for 4-point scale
Scale Range Interpretation
4 3.50-4.00 Very Acceptable
3 2.50-3.49 Acceptable
2 1.50-2.49 Moderately acceptable
1 0.50-1.49 Not acceptable

4
 0 0.00-0.49 Strongly not acceptable

Table 2
Evaluation rubric interpretation for 3-point scale
Scale Range Interpretation
2 1.50-2.00 Very Acceptable
1 0.50-1.49 Moderately acceptable
0 0.00-0.49 Not acceptable

Meanwhile, to identify the inter-rater reliability of the data obtained, Fleiss Kappa
Values were interpreted using the table below.

Table 3
Fleiss Kappa values interpretation
Range Interpretation
<0 Poor Agreement
0.01-0.20 Slight Agreement
0.21-0.40 Fair Agreement
0.41-0.60 Moderate Agreement
0.61-0.80 Substantial Agreement
0.81-1.00 Almost perfect agreement

On the other hand, in analyzing the qualitative data obtained the researchers
transcribed the answers of the respondents for their observations and personal
reflections.

Results and Discussions

5
Table 4
Evaluation rubric rating cum interpretation obtained on phase 1

Criteria Rating Interpretation

OUTCOMES:
1. Bloom’s Taxonomy and the topic(s) are appropriate 2.00 Very Acceptable
2. Objective written in a behavioral form 2.00 Very Acceptable
3. Conditions/criteria included 2.00 Very Acceptable
4. Learners’ outcomes are appropriate for age level 2.00 Very Acceptable
5. Content is accurate 2.00 Very Acceptable
6. K-12 Learning Standards and benchmarks are 2.00 Very Acceptable
addressed
7. Lists ongoing process stand./benchmarks 2.00 Very Acceptable
ENGAGEMENT PHASE:
8. Engages students’ minds without directly teaching the 3.00 Acceptable
concept(s)
EXPLORATION PHASE:
9. Activity is hands-on/minds-on 3.50 Very Acceptable
10. Students are allowed to explore without direct 4.00 Very Acceptable
instruction
11. Allows for adequate practice 3.50 Very Acceptable
EXPLANATION PHASE:
12. Questions/directions lead students to understand the 3.50 Very Acceptable
concept(s)
13. The patterns/data found during the exploration are 3.50 Very Acceptable
used to develop the concept(s)
14. Students are involved in concept invention (not just 3.00 Acceptable
lecture)
15. Audio/visual aides are used to support concept 3.00 Acceptable
development
EXTENSION PHASE:
16. The activity further promotes the concept(s) 3.50 Very Acceptable
17. There is a logical connection between the extension 3.50 Very Acceptable
and the explanation
EVALUATION PHASE:
18. The assessment strategies are aligned with learner’s 3.50 Very Acceptable
outcomes
19. The scoring system matches the assessment(s) 3.50 Very Acceptable
20. Establishes individual accountability 3.50 Very Acceptable
21. Apply formative and summative techniques 3.50 Very Acceptable

6
MODIFICATIONS:
22. Accommodates developmental and 2.00 Very Acceptable
cultural/ethnic/gender differences
GENERAL:
23. Integrates for at least two additional areas 3.50 Very Acceptable
appropriate for grade level and lists at least two
references used for the plan
24. Safety issues are recognized and addressed 2.00 Very Acceptable
25. Supplementary resources are included 2.00 Very Acceptable
26. The phases of the 5E learning cycle are 3.50 Very Acceptable
coordinated and flow together
27. Appropriate materials and equipment are utilized 2.00 Very Acceptable
(provide copies of all handouts)
28. Technology is integrated into the lesson (not 2.00 Very Acceptable
overhead)
CONVENTIONS:
29. Organization 4.00 Very Acceptable
30. Spelling 4.00 Very Acceptable
31. Writing Mechanics 4.00 Very Acceptable

The evaluation rubric shows the ratings obtained for phase 1: For the outcomes, the
rating obtained is 2:00, for engagement, the rating is 3.00, for exploratory, 3.67,
explanation where rated 3.88, extension and evaluation where both rated 3.75,
modification where rated 2.00, general where rated 2.50 and conventions where rated
4.00, all phases where given an interpretation of a very acceptable meaning the result
of the demonstration and the execution of the lesson is very good, as seen in the
evaluation.

Among the criteria which was rated, convention have the highest rating with 4.00, the
next one is explanation with a rating of 3.88 and the third one are extension and
evaluation with 3.75 all very acceptable. Convention being the highest means the
totality of the demonstration and the lesson plan where organize properly, from the first
up to the last part.

7
Table 5
Evaluation rubric rating cum interpretation obtained on phase 2
OUTCOMES:
1. Bloom’s Taxonomy and the topic(s) are appropriate 2.00 Very Acceptable
2. Objective written in a behavioral form 2.00 Very Acceptable
3. Conditions/criteria included 2.00 Very Acceptable
4. Learners’ outcomes are appropriate for age level 2.00 Very Acceptable
5. Content is accurate 2.00 Very Acceptable
6. K-12 Learning Standards and benchmarks are
addressed 2.00 Very Acceptable
7. Lists ongoing process stand./benchmarks 2.00 Very Acceptable
ENGAGEMENT PHASE:
8. Engages students’ minds without directly teaching the
concept(s) 3.50 Very Acceptable
EXPLORATION PHASE:
9. Activity is hands-on/minds-on 4.00 Very Acceptable
10. Students are allowed to explore without direct
instruction 3.50 Very Acceptable
11. Allows for adequate practice 4.00 Very Acceptable
EXPLANATION PHASE:
12. Questions/directions lead students to understand the
concept(s) 4.00 Very Acceptable
13. The patterns/data found during the exploration are
used to develop the concept(s) 4.00 Very Acceptable
14. Students are involved in concept invention (not just
lecture) 3.50 Very Acceptable
15. Audio/visual aides are used to support concept
development 4.00 Very Acceptable
EXTENSION PHASE:
16. The activity further promotes the concept(s) 3.50 Very Acceptable
17. There is a logical connection between the extension
and the explanation 4.00 Very Acceptable
EVALUATION PHASE:
18. The assessment strategies are aligned with learner’s
outcomes 3.50 Very Acceptable
19. The scoring system matches the assessment(s) 4.00 Very Acceptable
20. Establishes individual accountability 4.00 Very Acceptable
21. Apply formative and summative techniques 3.50 Very Acceptable
MODIFICATIONS:

8
22. Accommodates developmental and
cultural/ethnic/gender differences 2.00 Very Acceptable
GENERAL:
23. Integrates for at least two additional areas
appropriate for grade level and lists at least two
references used for the plan 3.50 Very Acceptable
24. Safety issues are recognized and addressed 2.00 Very Acceptable
25. Supplementary resources are included 2.00 Very Acceptable
26. The phases of the 5E learning cycle are
coordinated and flow together 4.00 Very Acceptable
27. Appropriate materials and equipment are utilized
(provide copies of all handouts) 2.00 Very Acceptable
28. Technology is integrated into the lesson (not
overhead) 2.00 Very Acceptable
CONVENTIONS:
29. Organization 3.50 Very Acceptable
30. Spelling 4.00 Very Acceptable
31. Writing Mechanics 3.50 Very Acceptable

The evaluation rubric shows the ratings obtained for phase 2: For the outcomes,
the rating obtained is 2:00, for engagement, the rating is 3.50, for exploratory, 3.83,
explanation where rated 3.25, extension and evaluation where both rated 3.75,
modification where rated 2.00, general where rated 2. 58 and conventions where rated
3.67, all criteria where given an interpretation of a very acceptable, meaning the result
of the demonstration and the execution of the lesson is very good, as seen in the
evaluation.

The best part of the lesson is the explanation part which was rated 3.88, followed by the
exploratory which was rated 3. 83, this numbers were very high, in fact the key areas in
every demonstration or class discussion is the activity specially differentiated activities
where students can explore diversity in one concept or topic. Explanatory part is very
important in all lesson because in this part the teacher can correct misconceptions and
assess critical or higher form of thinking among students.

9
In terms of the inter-rater reliability the coefficient obtained was 0.51 which can be
interpreted as “Moderate Agreement” therefore the rating obtained from the evaluation
rubric rated by a total of four respondents are reliable.

Comparing the result of the evaluation of rubric rating for lesson plan from phase 1 and
2, both evaluation shows that exploratory part and explanation part where upgraded,
modified and engaging activities where incorporated in the lesson, and the discussion
were design as student centered, emphasizing awareness to the degraded
environment. Convention were rated a bit lower in phase 2 compared to phase 1,
maybe because the teacher focuses on the key factors of the lesson.

Reaching very acceptable as an interpretation, which is the highest means the lesson
and the demonstration were exceptional. It can be used in seminars or division
demonstration. Modifying other parts, like changing (criteria’s rated lower) for
improvement can also help in achieving an outstanding lesson plan and demonstration

Conclusions and Recommendations

References

Imam, O. A., Mastura, M. A., Jamil, H., & Ismail, Z. (2014). Reading Comprehension
Skills and Performance in Science Among High School Students in the
Philippines. ​Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education​ ​, 29,​ 81-94.

10
Lewis, C. & Tsuchida, I. (1998). A lesson is like a swiftly flowing river: Research lessons
​ inter, 14-17
and the improvement of Japanese education. ​American Educator, W
& 50-52.
Lewis, C. (2000, April). Lesson study: The core of Japanese professional development.
Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual
Meeting, New Orleans.
Nuchanart Nesusin et al. (2013). Development of lesson plans by the lesson study
approach for the 6th grade students in social study subject based on open
approach innovation. ​Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 116 ( 2014 )
1411 – 1415
Rock, T. & Wilson, C. (2005). Improving teaching through lesson study​. Teacher
Education Quartely, 77-92
Stigler, J., & Hiebert, J., (1999). ​The teaching gap.​ New York: The Free Press.

11