Mutualism In Lesson Study

Abstrak Lesson study has commonly three stages in the implementation. They are plan, do, and see. In the process, a relationship occurs between people who are involved in it. They are the teachers, students, and observers. This research focuses about the positive relation happened between teachers and observers. Positive relation between people who are involved in learning process could improve classroom quality. The positive relation is named ‘mutualism’. In biological term, mutualism is when two organisms of different species "work together", each benefiting from the relationship. Meaning contained in the term is used by the researcher to indicate a relationship that occurs in the lesson study process. This research aims at finding out the mutualism in lesson study, especially the mutualism between teachers and students. The method used in this research was qualitative method. The research took place at English Education Study Program, Cokroaminoto Palopo University, South Sulawesi, Indonesia. Teachers and students in this institution were taken as the participants of the research. Data gained through classroom observation and focus group interview. The result of the research shows that mutualism happens between teachers and observers.


Pendahuluan
Lesson study (LS) is one of the models to improve professionalism of an education practitioner (teacher/lecturer) through collaborative and simultaneous learning study based on the principles of collegiality and mutual learning to build a learning community (Mulyana, 2007). Based on Fauziyah and Uchtiawati's research, lesson study as a training model of educators' profession through sustainable and collaborative learning assessments is based on the principles of collegiality which is mutual help in learning to establish a learning community.
The principles of lesson study coincide with the idea that learning is a social and situated process; and for teachers, their own classroom is the best venue for them to learn and improve their teaching practices. It follows a cyclical step which involves: 1) collaborative goal setting and planning the study lesson (Fernandez & Yoshida, 2004) or research lesson (Lewis, 2002); 2) implementing and observing the research lesson; 3) debriefing and reflecting on the observed lesson; 4) revising the research lesson (optional or whenever necessary); 5) teaching the revised research lesson (optional or whenever necessary); and 6) sharing of thoughts about the outcomes of the research lesson or post-lesson reflection and discussion (PRD). Collaborative working towards a common goal is considered by many scholars as central to school reforms (Darling-Hammond & McLaughlin, 2011). According to Brownwell, et al., (2006), doing this helps teachers improve their instructional practices. Besides improving their professional wellbeing and students' learning (Louis, 2006), working collaboratively provides an opportunity where teachers improve with the help of the thought processes of their peers (Bower & Richards, 2006). Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (2011) stressed that an effective professional development for teachers provides them with opportunities and appropriate support structures that encourage them to work critically on the continuous improvement of their pedagogical knowledge. It must be a lifelong and a dynamic process that is focused on learning and reflecting from everyday teaching experience (Maskit, 2011). According to Lewis (2002), the idea included in Lesson Study is actually succinct and simple, which is when a teacher/lecturer wants to improve their learning quality, one of the proper ways is to collaborate with other teachers/lecturers to design, monitor, and do a reflection on the conducted learning strategy.
Various researches have conducted by many researchers about the process and the impact of lesson study. Gutierez (2015) succeeded to identify three challenges in implementing inquiry-based teaching in elementary school science education in the Philippines, they are, 1) the lack of support, training and available inquiry-based materials; 2) the overemphasis on assessing content learning rather than learning through inquiry; and 3) the misconception, difficulty, and time consuming nature of inquiry-based teaching. Saito and Atencio (2015) stated that by implementing the LS, it means that one school tries to emphasize democratic practices and social justice for teachers and students at the local level. LSLC assumes that everyone is accepted and cared for, whatever their circumstances or beliefs. LSLC reform stands in stark and emphatic opposition to neo-liberalistic approaches. Moreover, in contrast to these educative systems, where only the strongest students and highest achievers are valued, and where competition is rampant according to universal standardization on behalf of central authorities, LSLC is an approach that seeks more profound and meaningful outcomes for all. This vision is based upon ideals of equality and justice, appreciating uniqueness of individual children and their teachers based in local communities. Then LSLC aims to change the structure of lessons, schools and their cultures, in order to render the 'invisible visible' and to facilitate their incorporation into the school community. For example, under LSLC, professional development time is maximized by restructuring daily administrative duties; mutual help-seeking and consultation are prioritized by making learning more collaborative and by reforming daily lessons; teachers' views towards lessons are shifted to focus on children's signaled needs; and perspectives on learning shift to acknowledge and accept the inevitable role of fallibility, confusion, and struggle. Another researcher, Robinson (2016) found that students with formal teaching experiences had the greatest amount of teacher self-efficacy in the area of classroom management prior to (M = 6.73, SD = 0.84) and at the end of (M = 7.68, SD = 0.76) instruction. Those without teaching experience had the greatest amount of teacher self-efficacy in the area of classroom management (M = 5.98, SD = 1.22) prior to instruction and instructional practices (M = 8.02, SD = 0.95) at the end of instruction. The greatest amount of growth for both groups was in the area of instructional practices (Mean Differences = 1.38 and 2.71). Those with teaching experience were least efficacious with student engagement (M = 6.10, SD = 0.78 prior to instruction; M = 7.33, SD = 0.49 end of instruction). Those without previous teaching experiences had the least amount of efficacy in the area of instructional practices (M = 5.31, SD = 1.03) prior to instruction and classroom management (M = 7.71, SD = 1.09) at the end of instruction. While Demir, et all (2013) did research to find out how Japanese lesson study can be a practical guide for making improvements in teaching and learning in college setting, and they found that (1) Lesson study promotes reform-based pedagogical practices; (2) Lesson study promotes reflective teaching practices; (3) Lesson study promotes awareness of student thinking and misconceptions; and (4) Lesson study promotes collaboration with colleagues.
All the researches above show that lesson study gives contribution and positive impact in the process of teaching and learning. The positive effect can be achieved when there is good mutual learning between people who are involved in the process of teaching and learning. In lesson study, we have teacher, students, and observers who works together to create a good learning.
That is why this research studies about the positive relation happened between them, especially the between teachers and observers. Positive relation between people who are involved in learning process could improve classroom quality. The positive relation is named 'mutualism'. In biological term, mutualism is when two organisms of different species "work together", each benefiting from the relationship. Meaning contained in the term is used by the researcher to indicate a relationship that occurs in the lesson study process. This research aims at finding out the mutualism in lesson study, especially the mutualism between teachers and observers.

Method
The research took place at English Education Study Program, Cokroaminoto Palopo University, South Sulawesi, Indonesia. The Lesson Study program has been implemented in this institution since 2014. Al teachers in this institution were taken as the participants of the research. All the teachers have ever become teachers and observers in the implementation of lesson study. Data gained through focus group interview. Focus group interview is a qualitative technique for data collection. According to Denscombe (2007), focus group consist of a small group of people, usually between six and nine in number, who are brought together by a trained moderator (the researcher) to explore attitudes and perceptions, feelings and ideas about a topic. In addition, focus group interview aims at collecting high-quality data in a social context (Patton, 2002), which primarily help understand a specific problem from the viewpoint of the participant of research (Khan & Manderson, 1992). The data gained from the focus group interview were transcribed, classified and analyzed to find out the answer of the research question. . . .

Hasil dan Pembahasan
Based on the focus group interview, the results and discussion cover two major points, they are as follows:

Teaching and Learning Process
Lesson study is one of the models to improve professionalism of an education practitioner (teacher/lecturer) through collaborative and simultaneous learning study based on the principles of collegiality and mutual learning to build a learning community (Mulyana, 2007). In lesson study, model teacher and observers have interaction in plan and see phase, while in do the observers focus on observing how students learn so there were no interactions between model teacher and observers. On the plan phase, the model teacher and observers discussed the lesson plan that was already made by the model teacher. The lesson plan covers teaching materials, learning model or learning strategy, learning instrument, and the assessment that was relevant with the purposes of learning. The result of this phase is based on the discussion results; the model teacher revised the lesson plan according to the suggestions and advices from the observers. While on the see phase, the model teacher and observers did reflection and evaluation process relating to the learning process that they had done in do phase. The model teacher presented some points or we can say a self-reflection about points that had or had not been conducted in accordance with the designed lesson plan. The model teacher presented also the challenges, obstacles and also his/her good point in the learning process. Next, the observers presented their observation result about the learning process based on the model teacher's and students' learning actions in do phase. The observation result consists of how students learn, what kind of good learning that the observers got from the learning process, and also suggestion to improve lesson plan and learning action for the next implementation. According to Lewis, et al. (2009), lesson study was able to improve the teachers' knowledge and self-esteem, teachers' professional community, and the quality of learning sources. By seeing the result and discussion above, it may concluded that teachers have an improvement in handling or managing their class by having valuable suggestion from the observers in plan and see, whereas the observers have a new experience from the teachers in how to conduct or manage a class in order to get a good teaching and learning process.

Motivation
The second point of mutualism in lesson study between model teacher and observers is motivation. Fauziyah and Uchtiawati (2017) proposed that in lesson study, the target audience may not feel superior (feeling the cleverest) or inferior (low self-esteem) but all participants in lesson study activities should be intended to learn each other. Participants who have already known or have more knowledge must be willing to share with other participants who do not understand, otherwise participants who have not understood should be willing to ask the participants who have already understood. The process happened in lesson study phase can energized both model teacher and observer to improve the quality of learning. The process in lesson study make them motivated each other so they can produce and conduct a better learning process. According to Ryan and Deci (2000), to be motivated means to be moved to do something. A person who feels no impetus or inspiration to act is thus characterized as unmotivated, whereas someone who is energized or activated toward an end is considered motivated.

Conclusion
As a conclusion, mutualism happens between teachers and observers in term of two points. First is in the point of teaching and learning process where teachers have an improvement in managing their class by having valuable suggestion from the observers in plan and see, whereas the observers have a new experience from the teachers in how to conduct or manage a class in order to get a good teaching and learning process. The second point is in term of motivation. Both teacher and observer feel motivated in improving classroom quality, especially in improving students' competences, so they were motivated each others.