**Abstract**

The aim of the study has been to investigate the researcher's role in an intervention study using Lesson Study as a mediating artifact for teachers' professional development. The research question addressed in this article is: "How can the researcher act and react to the challenges that emerge when enhancing the development of practice and still allow teachers to own and manage the project"? An argument for this study is that there are several studies that point out that the researcher's role in intervention research in which teachers and researchers cooperate are of great importance. At the same time, little research describes the researcher's role and function during a research project. This article describes and explores the researcher's role in facing challenges in a practice-oriented intervention during the study. This study lasted for a period of two years. To answer the research question, I have used several data sources to get a holistic picture of the researcher role. Data sources consist of interviews, teacher's reflection notes, research log and observations. This study verifies that the researcher's role and approach are of crucial importance for change and development.

**Keywords:** researchers' role, intervention study, Lesson Study, CHAT (cultural historical activity history)

## **1. Introduction**

Several countries have invested considerably in teachers' professional development [1]. To date, professional development for teachers has been largely based on formal approaches, such as professional development programs, mentoring, courses and workshops, and introductions to new methods and techniques [1–3]. According to Opfer and Pedder [4], formal approaches that are characterized by isolated events do not give due consideration to the fact that teachers' professional development is part of a complex system that encompasses individual teachers, interactions between multiple teachers, school systems, and teachers' dealings with them. In the field of research and development work in schools, interactions between teachers, school management, interventions and often external researchers, must also be considered, adding another layer of complexity to the system overall. Recent research has indicated that both schools and teachers strive to facilitate constructive and meaningful inter-teacher interactions that will promote teachers' development within this complex system ([5–7]; Norwegian [8]).

Studies have also demonstrated that, despite increased interest in collective learning and the popularity of collaboration between teachers, few changes have been implemented in practice and major revisions are rarely enacted [5, 9, 10].

An expert group on the teacher's role [11] appointed by the Norwegian Ministry of Education, particularly recommended that researchers and teachers should cooperate more closely on research and development work aimed at improving of schools and teaching practices. The group also emphasized the necessity of strengthening the role of research in the organization of teachers' workloads and in cooperative activities among teachers. While a more robust culture of research collaboration between researchers and practitioners is undoubtedly a priority, Norway's Ministry of Education [8] noted a dearth in researchers with sufficient expertise. This is supported by Nilsson and Postholm [12], who have found that there are too few researchers and teacher educators in Norway with the necessary competence to conduct research based on development processes. This is also supported by Tan [13] who believes that the challenge posed by the lack of researchers with the relevant expertise is also an international problem. Insufficient consideration has been afforded to the quality of the researcher's role by policymakers and education experts who front the agenda and promote teachers' professional development [13].

This article focuses on a practice-oriented intervention study in which the researcher and the participating teachers collaborated with the aim of improving teaching practice to optimize students' outcomes. The study's primary objective was to investigate the researcher's role in intervention research of this nature, and Lesson Study (LS) was the method used to structure and organize the developmental work. Burner [14] emphasizes that intervention means disrupting teachers' existing practice in some way or other and points out that researchers must be mindful and considerate of this. In intervention research that involves collaboration between teachers and researchers, the researcher must consider two types of reflexivity [15]: epistemological reflexivity wherein the researcher considers their own values and understandings, and methodological reflexivity wherein the researchers evaluate their own impact on their respective fields of practice.

The study was carried out from September 2015 to April 2017 at a small Norwegian school that covers grades 1 to 10 (students' ages ranged from 6 to 15 years). For the purposes of the study, the teachers were organized into six teams, four at the elementary level and two at the secondary level, and all teachers at the school participated in the LS project. My focus in this study was on the researcher's role (i.e., my role) in working with the two secondary teams.

My research question was as follows: *How do the researcher act and react to the challenges that emerge when enhancing the development of practice and still allow teachers to own and manage the project?* To answer this question, I will describe and analyze how I (the researcher) dealt with the challenges and opportunities that arose, with the aim of providing a thinking tool for other researchers in similar projects. Before presenting my findings, I will describe the theoretical and methodological framework used and how I, as a researcher, behaved during the study. Finally, I will analyze my findings in the light of relevant theoretical perspectives and research that supports these findings. First, LS is introduced briefly below.

#### **1.1 Introduction to lesson study**

Lesson Study (LS) is a method aimed at enhancing teaching and building pedagogical knowledge involves a group of teachers who wants to improve aspects of their

#### *The Researcher's Role: An Intervention Study Using Lesson Study in Norway DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.101100*

teaching and to optimize their students' learning experiences [16–18]. LS is a classroom inquiry method in which a group of teachers meet regularly to collaborate regarded to planning and teaching and to share observations, reflections and analysis related to their teaching and students' learning experiences. In LS, teachers assume an active role in exploring and refining their lessons for improved teaching and learning [19]. Lewis, Perry, and Murata [20] emphasize that LS processes are largely owned and led by the participants, in that they are practice-oriented, school-based, and facilitate the sharing and building of knowledge. The notion that LS are owned and led by the teachers is contestable: Takahashi and McDougal [21] claims that in Japan, where the LS method was originally developed, LS always includes a researcher or an external *knowledgeable other* who participates as a facilitator to support the process and to challenge the teachers. Most LS projects outside Japan are executed by teachers without the participation of researchers or *knowledgeable others* [21]. Takahashi [22] insist, however, that studies implementing the LS method require an external researcher or *knowledgeable other* who can: (1) provide access to a deeper understanding of the content the teachers are investigating and, (2) offer perspectives on the LS work and process that differ from those of the teachers. Takahashi [22] also emphasizes how important it is for researchers to assist others in learning how to reflect on teaching and learning.

The overall focus of the LS groups in this study was related to challenges facing teachers with regard to students' writing in various subjects. An overall goal was that teachers should augment their knowledge of teaching and their understanding of students to improve their teaching practices through collective development processes. Lewis [17] asserts that knowledge acquisition with regard to students' thinking and learning process and ways of improving teaching practice are two essential principles of the LS method.

## **2. Theoretical framework**

Cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) was adopted as the theoretical foundation and framework for this research. Intervention studies based on CHAT aim to promote changes in practice by means of interventions that create new content in various parts of the activity system [23]. The researcher's role in interventions based on CHAT is to promote and maintain an expansive learning process led and owned by the teachers ([24], p. 15). Research that adopts a CHAT approach, therefore, examines participants' interactions and social constructions, and aims to improve practice while the research is being conducted [25, 26]. It is important that the researcher enter the field with a reflexive approach; this requires the ability to reflect introspectively on his or her own values, thoughts, and actions and to modify these in accordance with the field of practice [15]. In qualitative research, a process wherein the researcher reflects on his or her own role is described as a *reflexive process* [15, 27, 28].

The researcher (myself) and teachers (participants) involved in this research shared the objective of developing the teachers' teaching practice and cooperated toward common purpose of building knowledge, enhancing teaching, and optimizing student learning. However, a researcher may be confronted with various challenges in collaboration with teachers with regard to fundamental pedagogical perspectives, the establishment of trust between participants in the community, cooperation between teachers, the intervention itself, different perspectives on approaches to professional development, and research and development processes that need to be addressed [22, 26, 29]. Intervention research and development work conducted within the

CHAT framework always constitutes a dialog between the researcher and participants [24], meaning that it is neither the researcher nor the participants alone who set the guidelines for the process. The focus and direction of the work is determined in dialogs between the researcher and the participants, and, therefore, it is crucial that meaningful dialogs are created and maintained among the research community. In this study, participants actively explored and researched their own practices, though they were not characterized as researchers.

In any given activity system (in this context, the school), the community is likely to hold different views and divergent interests, which may give rise to tensions and contradictions [30]. CHAT is a dialectical theory, and the dialectical terms "tensions" and "contradictions" are crucial [24]. According to Engeström [30], tensions and contradictions are potential sources of change and transformation. Vygotsky [31], on whose thoughts and ideas CHAT builds, emphasized the use of language as a mediating artifact, as when teachers plan or reflect cooperatively. In the context of individual learning, Vygotsky introduced the concepts of the *actual development zone* (ADZ) and the *zone of proximal development* (ZPD). The ADZ defines what a person thinks and does alone, whereas the ZPD represents the difference between what a person can do alone and what he or she can do with the help of a competent other. Engeström [32] adapted Vygotsky's individually oriented concept of the ZPD to promote collective activity to a greater extent, seeing it as "the distance between the present everyday actions of the individual and the historical new form of the societal actions that can be collectively generated" ([32], p. 174). The researcher's role is to promote and maintain an expansive transformation process that is led and owned by the teachers ([24], p. 15) and, together with the participants in the project, to be a competent other. This relates to Takahasi's [22] emphasis on the important role of the researcher or *the knowledgeable other* in interactions of this nature, wherein the researcher supports the teachers' work by encouraging what they are doing well, asking questions and by challenging them with other perspectives and critical thinking.

Engeström [33] demonstrated how colleagues can develop and generate new learning conditions together by adopting an inquiry-based approach. He subsequently linked this to the concept of *expansive learning.* This requires teachers in professional learning communities to be willing to investigate their own practices with the aim of exploring and developing *something that is not yet there* ([24], p. 2). Fundamental to the LS method is the exploration of challenges and problems related both to teaching and the students' experiences. LS aims to better understand and resolve the challenges that teaching practice presents [20, 21]. Experimentation with new teaching methods in response to challenges and problems is key to improving teaching; the focus is on developing practices that are *not yet there.* In this way, CHAT and expansive learning together form the overarching framework, while LS functions as a mediating artifact for learning and teachers' professional development.
