Who is this flipbook for and how might it be used?

1 Introduction

1.1 What is the goal of this flipbook?

2 Key Ideas of Lesson Study in Initial Teacher Education

2.1 What are the Key Characteristics of Lesson Study?

2.2 What is the Lesson Study Process like?

2.3 Who is involved in Lesson Study?

3 Models and Variants of Lesson Study in Initial Teacher Education

3.1 How do different Lesson Study models work in practice?

3.1.1 University-centred Lesson Study

3.1.2 Practicum-centred Lesson Study

3.1.3 Hybrid Lesson Study

4 Going into Practice

4.1 How can your context shape the way you do Lesson Study?

4.1.1 Time allocation for Lesson Study

4.1.2 Group size

4.1.3 Presence of educators

4.1.4 Presence of other Pre-Service Teachers

4.1.5 Phase of Initial Teacher Education where Lesson Study is implemented

4.1.6 Grading/Evaluation of the LS project

4.1.7 Lesson Study project across Europe

4.2 How can ethical, respectful and safe practices be ensured in Lesson Study?

4.2.1 Establishing a safe space for open and productive discussion

4.2.2 When observing students in the research lesson(s)

4.2.3 Storing collected data in a safe space

4.3 How can you overcome common challenges in implementing Lesson Study?

4.3.1 Suggestions for undertaking LS in ITE

4.3.2 Mentors (Teacher Educators and School-based Mentors)

4.3.3 Institutions

Who is this flipbook for and how might it be used?

This flipbook is for Teacher Educators (TEs), school leaders, and other stakeholders who are interested in implementing Lesson Study in Initial Teacher Education (LS in ITE). We assume that, although your roles may differ, you share a common interest: improving Pre-Service Teachers’ (PSTs’) learning through LS.

The main goal of this flipbook is to offer both a general orientation and practical suggestions for carrying out LS in ITE contexts.

The ideas in this flipbook may feel familiar or be new. They may be familiar if you have previously engaged in LS in other settings (for example, in a professional development context) or if you have experience with action research or communities of inquiry, which share some similarities with LS. LS may also be entirely new to you. We therefore expect that some readers will use this flipbook as an introduction to LS.

As readers will come with different levels of experience, the flipbook is designed to be used both linearly and non-linearly. You may move freely between chapters, depending on the topics you wish to explore in more depth. However, if you are new to LS, we recommend starting with the first and second chapters, which introduce the core ideas and provide a foundation for reading the chapters that follow.

Throughout the flipbook, you will find internal and external links that make it easy to access related content. You will also find a set of guiding questions that you can use whenever you are ready to select the LS variant that best fits your context. These guiding questions are accessible by clicking the decision tree button.

decision tree  

Finally, the flipbook includes case studies that illustrate how LS can be adapted to different ITE contexts and subjects. We also encourage you to explore the resources attached to this flipbook, which you can download and use directly with PSTs.

1. Introduction

1.1 What is the goal of this flipbook?

This document is part of the Lesson Study in Future Teacher Education (LIFT) project’s resource suite designed to support the implementation of Lesson Study (LS) within Initial Teacher Education (ITE). It aims to assist stakeholders across ITE programmes in shaping and enacting this process.

At its core, LS is a practice-based process where Pre-Service Teachers (PSTs), Teacher Educators (TEs) or mentors collaboratively plan, conduct, and reflect on a research lesson designed to address a specific issue about student learning. This involves in-depth preparation: studying the curriculum and research, designing detailed lesson plans with anticipated student responses, and enacting and observing the lesson. Structured reflection follows, based on evidence of student learning, with the goal of improving both understanding of the teaching issue and participants’ learning.

In ITE, LS not only enhances pedagogical and educational knowledge, but also develops PSTs’ collaborative, reflective, and inquiry skills. It can address broader priorities such as inquiry-based learning, inclusive practices, or technology use. Given the constraints of ITE, the LS process can be adapted to various contexts, like practicum settings or coursework. This flipbook is designed to provide assistance when adapting LS to different contexts, while respecting its fundamental elements.

Purpose

This document is intended to guide Teacher Educators (TEs) and Pre-Service Teachers (PSTs) in incorporating Lesson Study (LS) into Initial Teacher Education (ITE). In a context of teacher shortages across Europe, strengthening ITE quality in a sustainable way is critical: LS provides a collaborative framework that allows PSTs to grow professionally, develop their sense of self-efficacy and adapt their practice to focus on student learning. The Lesson Study in Future Teacher Education (LIFT) project builds on experimented LS models to empower PSTs through meaningful partnerships, offering different resources to promote high-quality ITE.

The purpose of this flipbook is to support TEs in using LS in ITE programs for all school levels. It is addressed to TEs at teacher education institutions and to school-based mentors or cooperating teachers who collaborate with ITE. It will also be of interest to PSTs participating in lesson studies.

What is Lesson Study?

LS is a practice-based teacher education approach in which a group of participants – in ITE, PSTs and TEs – work together in preparing, enacting and reflecting on a lesson. The activity begins with the LS group identifying a research question, often based on a common learning challenge observed among school students. The group then collaboratively formulates the aim of the lesson in relation to this question, using it to guide planning and reflection throughout the LS cycle. Then, the activity proceeds by carrying out a study of curriculum materials, professional and research papers and other documents that address such difficulty and perhaps making a close diagnostic of students’ knowledge and difficulties. Then, based on this, the participants do a detailed planning of a lesson. This lesson, called the research lesson, is enacted by a member of the group and observed by the remaining members. Finally, considering the aims of the lesson, the group reflects on the observed students’ learning and provides suggestions for improvement in the lesson plan and in the way the lesson was enacted. This process typically spans six to eight working sessions, including the research lesson, and may require approximately 12 hours of collaborative work.

Why use Lesson Study in Initial Teacher Education?

The LS process can be considered in a systemic way, as it creates a community of learning with different interrelated layers. The school students are learning during the research lesson, and they should know that the goal of the observation is to improve teaching and their learning so that they feel part of the community of learning.

The preservice or in-service teachers participating in the LS acquire professional knowledge related to the effect of their teaching on students’ learning. Literature in this field shows that this learning may take various forms: better linking theory and practice, adopting a reflective and inquiry stance, developing collaborative skills, fostering teacher noticing, focusing on pupils and learning rather than on teaching, developing an attitude to anticipate pupils’ reasoning, deepening subject-matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge, as well as improving teaching skills such as precise language use and time management.

The process also helps TEs, researchers, textbook authors, and school administrators inquire into their own practice. Moreover, joint participation in the process, even if it is only in an open research lesson and the discussion surrounding it, strengthens connections between the different parts of the education system.

Supervision of planning, conducting lessons, and reflecting on students’ learning may sound familiar to TEs. The difference is in the complexity and the depth of the process, which requires Teacher Educators to carry it out in systematic steps that allow for “decomposition of practice” (Grossman et al., 2009). Both the preparatory work for the lesson plan and the lesson plan itself are developed in detail, with careful consideration of various tasks that could support the achievement of the established aim. The lesson plan may include:

i. the learning task(s)

ii. the lesson structure

iii. the teacher’s actions

iv. the anticipated students’ responses along with the strategies and difficulties for each part of the task, and

v. the formative evaluation of students’ learning.

In parallel, one may also prepare data collection instruments to support observation and analysis during the research lesson. The reflection of the lesson is done in a structured way based on actual observations and data regarding students’ learning collected by the teacher and the other participants.

LS in ITE has the ultimate goal of improving student learning, by contributing to the LS group members’ professional development. With their participation in LS, PSTs, TEs and school-based mentors gain insight into the learning process of school students in order to improve one’s own actions as a teacher in practice so that students can learn better. LS also reinforces the inquiry stance and the collaborative culture usually existing in ITE. It is specifically targeted at developing PSTs’ expertise in their pedagogical content knowledge (or didactical knowledge) and educational knowledge. It also promotes the reflective and collaborative skills of the participants, among PSTs and between PSTs and TEs.

Besides the general goal of developing didactical and educational knowledge, LS in ITE may also support more specific aims. These include exploring curricular approaches such as inquiry-based learning, preparing and leading whole-class discussions, using technology in the classroom, conducting inclusive education, and developing a relational practice perspective. The consideration of these more specific goals may justify increasing the number of sessions a bit.

What are the different ways to conduct Lesson Study in Initial Teacher Education?

LS in ITE may be conducted in a variety of ways and with different PST groups. When PSTs are in their practicum, they may be working in isolation, in pairs, or small groups. Sometimes, it is possible to join PSTs working individually or in pairs in a small group of three or four. A small group with three or four PSTs preparing a common research lesson is a very good organisation to carry out LS, but this may be adapted to other arrangements LS can also be used within existing courses (methods or didactics, for instance), giving the TEs as well as the students a new window to look at their professional thinking and pupils’ learning. In that situation, depending on the number of students, one or more research lesson could be prepared and discussed. Adaptations are required though, and a good knowledge of LS is needed from the educators. The purpose of this flipbook is to help ITE stakeholders navigating the different possibilities and chose the best-fitting one to the context of the institution, while maintaining the fundamental characteristics and benefits of LS.

2 Key Ideas of Lesson Study in Initial Teacher Education

2.1 What are the Key Characteristics of Lesson Study?

As stated by Lewis (2002), Lesson Study (LS) is at the same time, very simple and very complex:

Lesson Study is a simple idea. If you want to improve instruction, what could be more obvious than collaborating with fellow teachers to plan, observe, and reflect on lessons? While it may be a simple idea, Lesson Study is a complex process, supported by collaborative goal setting, careful data collection on student learning, and protocols that enable productive discussion of difficult issues.  pp. 1–2)

The essence of LS is in this process. Its primary purpose is not, in fact, to design a lesson: it is for the participants to learn about the impact of teaching decisions on student learning.

These five big ideas (Goei et al., 2021), can help you familiarize yourself with the key characteristics of LS:

In the case of PSTs, some adaptations from the more common in-service setting need to be made. This flipbook proposes several ways to do so in Chapter 3.

2.2 What is the Lesson Study Process like?

LS is often graphically represented as a cycle.

The LS process, with in-service or Pre-Service Teachers, may be described in the following way:

“In a Lesson Study, a group of teachers or a combined group of teachers and Teacher Educators/researchers work together, identifying the students’ difficulties on a given concept or issue, studying the related curriculum guidelines and research results, analysing tasks, and planning what they consider as a suitable lesson to address the proposed concept or issue. This “research lesson” is taught by a member of the group to a class of students, whereas the others observe the lesson with a focus on student learning. The participants seek to verify to what extent this lesson achieves the sought objectives and what difficulties arise. On the basis of this analysis, they may revise the lesson and re-teach it to another class […] Given the focus and the nature of the process, lesson studies may be regarded as a small investigation of the participants carried out on their own professional practice”

(Ponte, 2017, p. 169).

Identify issue in teaching and learning

At this stage, the group chooses a topic or an issue to focus on. This topic might be one that causes difficulty for students, is challenging to teach, one that PSTs want to get better at teaching. The topic can be disciplinary and/or cross-disciplinary focused. Before or at the start of the process, participants take time to get acquainted, clarify expectations, and agree on how they will collaborate as a group.

See how this stage is implemented in Portugal

Study material and Formulate research question

The study of materials and formulation of a research question is an essential but often overlooked stage. At this stage, the LS group analyses various resources in order to gain a deeper understanding of the initial issue. These resources may consist of official documents (national or school curricula), textbooks, texts from other LS, articles from professional journals, or other materials. At the end of this phase a research question is formulated.

See how this stage is implemented in Portugal

Plan research lesson

The LS group plans a research lesson based on the research question and aligned with the larger unit. When planning the research lesson, key components include the flow of the lesson, the observation related to each moment of the lesson and the anticipation of students’ responses.

See how this stage is implemented in Portugal

Teach and observe lesson

A member from the LS group teaches the research lesson while other members purposefully observe according to the lesson-observation plan. Observers usually do not intervene during the lesson.

See how this stage is implemented in Portugal

Reflect on lesson

The LS group shares their observations and discusses them in relation to the research question. As part of the reflection, the LS group plans modifications or changes to be implemented if the lesson is to be taught in the future. During this phase, an expert member, or koshi [see what this role means in 2.3], might be present to help the group linking theory to practice, highlighting new knowledge and fostering the reflection on teaching and learning. In some cases, this expert is also present in the planning stage. If the expert is unavailable, the Teacher Educator may assume this role.

See how this stage is implemented in Portugal

Share Lesson Study report

Utilising the results of the entire LS process, the LS group synthesises their reflection to produce a LS report. This report will be stored as part of a knowledge base and shared with a wider community (other LS groups, department, school, district, university…).

See how this stage is implemented in Portugal

These stages are chronological. Nevertheless, reflections during one stage might lead to revisiting a previous one. For example, a moment of the planning phase might lead to refinement of a part of the study phase or even the research question.

The group may decide to plan a modified version of the research lesson, mainly to better answer the research question.

2.3 Who is involved in Lesson Study?

The implementation of LS in ITE requires the active involvement of various stakeholders, such as TEs, mentor teachers, and PSTs. These stakeholders contribute in different ways and may take on multiple roles throughout the LS process. In the subsequent section, we examine these roles and how stakeholders may assume different roles throughout the LS process. While the description provided here is general, please refer to the case studies and the LS variant table for nuances and examples.

3. Models and Variants of Lesson Study in Initial Teacher Education

3.1 How do different Lesson Study models work in practice?

In the table below, we present three principal models of LS that are adaptable for ITE programmes. The selection of a particular model may be informed by various contextual factors, including the cohort size of PSTs, the availability and expertise of TEs and school-based mentors, and the alignment of teaching practicums and placements within the same schools.

By offering these diverse models, we aim to provide TEs with practical frameworks and insights that can facilitate the integration of LS within their own institutional settings.

To support this selection process, we have included a decision tree to help you explore which model and variant might suit your particular context. Please use the decision tree as a starting point for reflection, not a definitive or prescriptive guide.

decision tree

The details for each variant are also presented in the Variant Table. To clarify the roles of stakeholders — PSTs, TEs, and school-based mentors — within each variant, we have outlined their specific responsibilities across each stage of the LS cycle that we presented in Section 2.2 (Study, Plan, Teach/Observe, Reflect).

3.1.1 University-centred Lesson Study

(a) Peer-Microteaching LS

Peer-Microteaching LS involves PSTs completing the entire LS cycle at the university level, with peers acting as their “students”. This approach is typically integrated into ITE courses, allowing PSTs to first gain exposure to LS through lectures and coursework before engaging in Peer-Microteaching LS. In this process, PSTs often work in small groups of three to six to plan lessons, receive feedback from TEs and revise their plans collaboratively. The planned lessons are then taught to their peers within the cohort, with observations and feedback provided by TEs and colleagues.

(b) University-Hosted LS

This variant of LS engages PSTs in collaboratively planning a research lesson and implementing it with school students in a university setting. The cycle incorporates a needs-assessment phase in which PSTs interact directly with school students via video calls or face-to-face meetings to gather insights into their interests and needs. The school students are subsequently invited to the university, where the collaboratively designed lesson is conducted, allowing PSTs to apply their planning in an instructional context informed by the learners’ input.

3.1.2 Practicum-centred Lesson Study

(a) Independent Practicum LS

In the practicum-centred model, this variant of LS emphasises the autonomy of PSTs by removing the requirement for a school-based mentor during their practicum. Instead, PSTs form pairs and take full responsibility for the LS cycle, from planning and implementation to observation and reflection. Working collaboratively, each pair designs and teaches a lesson while the partner observes, followed by joint reflection to discuss evidence of student learning and areas for improvement. This peer-driven process nurtures professional independence, encourages critical dialogue, and strengthens PSTs’ capacity to give and receive constructive feedback. It also allows them to experience LS as a self-sustained, flexible model adaptable to diverse practicum contexts.

(b) Teacher-Educator-Supported Practicum LS

This variant of LS centres on strong support from TEs during the practicum phase. In this model, TEs guide PSTs through each stage of the LS cycle, offering subject-matter expertise, pedagogical insights, and alternative perspectives. Acting as advisors rather than supervisors, TEs are invited by PST groups to contribute ideas, attend the research lessons, and participate actively in post-lesson discussions. This collaborative structure positions the TEs as facilitators of reflective dialogue and professional growth, helping PSTs connect theory with classroom practice while maintaining ownership of their learning process.

(c) Mentor-Supported Practicum LS

This approach focuses on providing PSTs with authentic classroom experiences in a school setting during their teaching practicum. It typically involves PSTs collaborating with school-based mentors and TEs to implement the LS process. In this approach, PSTs, TEs and school-based mentors often work together to plan lessons, with mentors sometimes teaching the initial lesson. Feedback and reflections are used to identify challenges and make improvements, after which PSTs reteach the lesson to apply these refinements. Collaborative observation and post-lesson discussions are integral to this process, often involving school-based mentors, TEs and peers.

3.1.3 Hybrid Lesson Study

(a) University-School Hybrid LS

This variant of LS integrates two stages of teaching to scaffold PSTs’ learning. In the first stage, PSTs conduct peer micro-teaching sessions, treating their peers as students to test and refine their lesson plans in a safe, low-stakes environment. TEs and peers provide targeted feedback after each session, enabling PSTs to revise and improve their lesson plans through one or more cycles of reflection and adjustment. In the second stage, the revised lessons are implemented in real classroom settings with school students. This progression from peer micro-teaching to authentic teaching supports PSTs in developing confidence, pedagogical skills, and adaptive lesson design practices, while also allowing TEs to align course instruction with PSTs’ observed needs.

(b) School Hybrid LS

PSTs are introduced to the LS process as part of the ITE course. They collaboratively plan lessons at the university and then teach the research lesson in a school setting with school students. Since the lesson is conducted in the field, in-service teachers often participate by observing the research lesson and contributing to post-lesson discussions. In some cases, the lesson is taught by an in-service teacher.

Case Study: Portugal

(c) School-University Hybrid LS

This variant involves PSTs collaboratively planning the research lesson at the university, teaching it in a real classroom with school students, and then revising and reteaching it to their peers at the university. The reteaching phase focuses on addressing student interactions and questions from the school-based research lesson, while also providing an opportunity for PSTs to share their reflections and teaching strategies with classmates.

4. Going into Practice

4.1 How can your context shape the way you do Lesson Study?

Given the wide range of Lesson Study (LS) variants in Initial teacher Education (ITE), we have included a decision tree to support the selection of a contextually appropriate variant. It considers factors such as the location of LS implementation and involvement level of stakeholders, though these are only some of the many considerations that may arise in practice. This section highlights additional considerations that can shape how LS works in your setting. These factors, drawn from varied research contexts, provide insights into conditions, resources, and adaptations that can shape the design and effectiveness of different LS variants.

4.1.1 Time allocation for Lesson Study

This includes practical considerations such as the overall timeline of the cycle, the number of meetings scheduled, and the duration of each meeting. These elements can significantly affect how deeply participants can engage in planning, observation, and reflection, and may need to be adjusted to align with institutional schedules or participant availability.

4.1.2 Group size

The number of participants in a LS group is influenced by various factors, some of which may conflict with one another. One of the main factors is institutional constraints, which pertain to the conditions within the institution where the LS is to be conducted. This includes considerations such as the number of Pre-Service Teachers (PSTs), the PST/Teacher Educator (TE) ratio, and the availability of school-based mentors and classes. These constraints can sometimes conflict with the need to encourage active participation and collaboration among group members as much as possible.

Other factors to consider include the previous experience of group members with LS and the level of comfort among them. From this perspective, these factors can impact the autonomy of participants. If members are already familiar with the structure and dynamics of LS, they are likely to be more autonomous. Consequently, the TE may be able to support more groups, allowing for smaller group sizes.

Therefore, the number of participants in each group must be carefully considered, but there is no definitive “right” number. Based on our experience and the existing literature, we recommend forming groups consisting of two to five PSTs, with a maximum of six, if possible.

4.1.3 Presence of educators

This may include a facilitator, who guides discussions, maintains focus, and ensures progress through each phase, or a koshi (knowledgeable other) who provides subject-matter expertise. The presence of either depends on availability, and in some cases, one person may serve in both roles. It is therefore essential to define these roles clearly, even when they are performed by the same individual.

4.1.4 Presence of other Pre-Service Teachers

When multiple PSTs are placed at the same practicum school, it creates a shared teaching environment that supports collaboration, peer observation, and joint reflection. Working in similar classroom contexts allows PSTs to co-plan lessons more easily, observe each other’s teaching in real time, and reflect on comparable student interactions. This factor also expands the range of feasible LS variants. For example, it makes it possible to form a LS group within the same school, enabling more active involvement from school-based mentors. It also supports a more concentrated, practicum-centred LS model, rather than relying on hybrid arrangements that span both university and school settings.

4.1.5 Phase of Initial Teacher Education where Lesson Study is implemented.

The phase of ITE in which LS is implemented is also a factor to consider.  LS can take place at different points in the programme, at the beginning, before the teaching practicum, or during the practicum itself, and each timing serves a distinct purpose. When introduced early, it can help PSTs to build foundational collaboration and inquiry skills; when positioned before the practicum, it allows them to test and refine lesson planning in a low-stakes environment; and when integrated during the practicum, it supports direct application of learning in authentic classroom contexts. The chosen phase, therefore, shapes both the focus and depth of the LS experience.

4.1.6 Grading/Evaluation of the LS project

Another contextual factor is the grading or evaluation of the LS project. In some programmes, LS is formally graded, while in others it functions as a formative, non-assessed activity. These different approaches can influence how PSTs engage with the LS process and what aspects of their work are made visible, such as planning, collaboration, teaching, or reflection, as well as the timing of any evaluation.

Across contexts, TEs make different choices about how to approach evaluation in ways that align with their programme goals. For example, some prefer broad forms of recognition, such as pass/fail decisions, rather than detailed numerical grades. Others focus evaluation not on the individual PST but on process-oriented elements of the LS experience, including the quality of reflection, collaborative work, or engagement with inquiry.

There are also programmes in which reflection reports are read after any formal evaluation, with the intention of encouraging PSTs to write openly about their learning rather than shaping their reflections to meet perceived assessment expectations. In addition, some contexts make use of portfolios to document learning across the LS cycle, allowing multiple forms of evidence to be brought together over time.

However, in all cases, the teaching performance of a PST teaching the research lesson should not be evaluated.

4.1.7 Lesson Study project across Europe

Though this flipbook focuses on LS in ITE, many excellent resources have been developed to guide In-Service Teachers (ISTs) which may be of interest to readers.

Three examples are included here:

1. A guide on facilitation in the Swiss setting

    

   (Hoznour et al., 2024). 

    

2. A guide for ISTs in the Irish setting

    

   (Owens et al., 2023).

    

3. A guide for ISTs in the European context
   with a focus on reasoning in mathematics

    

   (Barbier et al., 2023).

4.2 How can ethical, respectful and safe practices be ensured in Lesson Study?

4.2.1 Establishing a safe space for open and productive discussion

Before the LS, it is essential to establish a safe space for open and productive discussions. This requires a comprehensive and inclusive strategy to create a secure learning environment for all participants. It involves proactive measures to reach an agreement and consensus on collaboration methods, emphasising respectful communication and the involvement of all stakeholders. This approach ensures a supportive atmosphere for every participant in the LS and every learner. The following resources or talk cards may prove useful.

• Conversation  Card 1: Getting to know each other and discussing expectations. Guiding questions: Who are we? What do we expect from the LS process? Intended outcome: A foundation for collaboration within the LS has been established, and there is consensus on it.
• Conversation  Card 2: Preparing for effective collaboration. Key question: How can we work together in a way enable mutual learning? Intended outcome: Consensus on collaboration methods.

• Conversation Card 3: Communication and metacommunication. To consciously enhance communication—and thereby your collaborative learning process—metacommunication might be essential: discussing the way you communicate.

4.2.2 When observing students in the research lesson(s)

Observing your case student: The observers note the specific behaviour of their case student. Occasionally, they zoom out to see what the rest of the class is doing, then return to observing their case student. This way, you get a good balance between specific, detailed information about the case and an impression of the behaviour of the rest of the class.

In general, during the research lesson, observers are explicitly instructed not to interfere with the lesson itself. This can often be challenging for colleague teachers who are observers. However, the observer’s role is akin to that of a fly on the wall. When designing and planning the research lesson, it is prudent to develop and agree upon a set of observation rules and suggestions. These rules provide structure for observing the research lesson and ensure the social safety of the students being observed in the classroom. It is also advised to develop an observational scheme. The following talk cards may be useful:

• Conversation card 13: Preparing observation’ can be helpful to develop observation rules and/or observational schemes.

4.2.3 Storing collected data in a safe space

In a LS, a substantial amount of information and data is typically gathered. The research lesson design includes a section in the LS plan that outlines the data collection methods, such as how observations will be conducted, which students will be interviewed, which student work will be utilised, what artefacts will be collected, and what additional information is necessary to address the research question. This section also details how observations are recorded via audio and video, and whether active consent is required from the participating students and, if they are minors, from their parents or guardians, especially if this is not covered by the school’s data management plan. During the preparation phase of the LS, it is also advisable to discuss where all developed artefacts, collected data, and information will be stored, such as on a shared drive like a Teams environment, SURF, One Drive, or a secure server like Research Drive, for the duration of the LS. This information should be explicitly stated in the consent form, including where the data will be stored and how it will be used. The data collected in this study are confidential and largely context-specific. These data must be stored on a secure server for the duration of the LS. The team needs to discuss who will have access to the data, who will have restricted access, and when the data will be deleted after use.

4.3 How can you overcome common challenges in implementing Lesson Study?

In the previous chapter, we explored various approaches to implementing LS in Initial Teacher Education (ITE), highlighting the adaptability of the model across different contexts. Building on this foundation, the current chapter delves into the common challenges that arise during the implementation of LS in ITE. Drawing from past research (Tan et al., 2024), it identifies challenges that may impede the effectiveness of LS implementation. To address these issues, we present practical suggestions and strategies informed by empirical studies, aiming to support stakeholders in navigating these challenges. By aligning research insights with actionable recommendations, this chapter provides a roadmap for finding the most fitting suggestions for key obstacles in LS in one’s own institutions.

4.3.1 Suggestions for undertaking LS in ITE

Aligned with the preceding sections, the challenges and recommendations for undertaking LS are categorized according to three key stakeholders: PSTs, mentors (which include TEs and school-based mentors) and institutions and are shown in the tables below.

4.3.2 Mentors (Teacher Educators and School-based Mentors)

4.3.3 Institutions