Cogent Education

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/oaed20

Enhancing non-cognitive skills by applying lesson

study in lower secondary education: A project in
Vietnam

Seonkyung Choi, Tatsuya Kusakabe & Yoshiyuki Tanaka |

To cite this article: Seonkyung Choi, Tatsuya Kusakabe & Yoshiyuki Tanaka | (2022) Enhancing
non-cognitive skills by applying lesson study in lower secondary education: A project in Vietnam,
Cogent Education, 9:1, 2082091, DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

© 2022 The Author(s). This open access

article is distributed under a Creative
Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.

Published online: 05 Jun 2022.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 657

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oaed20
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

TEACHER EDUCATION & DEVELOPMENT | REVIEW ARTICLE

Received: 08 March 2022
Accepted: 16 May 2022
*Corresponding author: Seonkyung
Choi, Global Career Design Center,
Hiroshima University, Hiroshima,
Japan.
E-mail: skchoi@hiroshima-u.ac.jp
Reviewing editor:
Lawrence Jun Zhang, Curriculum
and Pedagogy, University of
Auckland Faculty of Education and
Social Work, New Zealand
Additional information is available at
the end of the article
Enhancing non-cognitive skills by applying lesson
study in lower secondary education: A project in
Vietnam
Seonkyung Choi1*, Tatsuya Kusakabe2 and Yoshiyuki Tanaka3
Abstract: This study examined the quantitative relationship between lesson study
and non-cognitive skills in Vietnam, using t-test analysis for comparison before and
after. We also looked at the relationship between lesson study and cognitive skills,
teacher engagement and parental involvement. Unlike former studies, we found no
relationship between lesson study and cognitive skills, however that is consistent
with the general finding in the literature that lesson study seems to have more of an
impact on academic performance at the primary than at the secondary level.
Nonetheless, and most importantly, we did find a statistically significant relation­
ship between lesson study and non-cognitive skills, specifically extraversion and
conscientiousness, two of the Big Five traits that psychologists generally agree
make up the taxonomy of non-cognitive traits. We also found that lesson study led
teachers to have more dialogue with their students and parents to engage more
with their children on their academic progress. In light of the correlation between
lower secondary education and non-cognitive skills, these results suggest that

ABOUT THE AUTHORS PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

Seonkyung Choi (Ph.D., Kobe University) is an
Assistant Professor at Hiroshima University and
also a research fellow at its Center for the Study
of International Cooperation in Education. Her
research interests focus on the labor market
outcomes (employment, wages, job status) of
Technical and Vocational Education, especially
secondary vocational education, in various
countries including South Korea, Indonesia,
Vietnam and the Philippines. She is also investi­
gating non-cognitive skills and how they can be
enhanced, focusing on causal inference methods.
Tatsuya Kusakabe is an Associate Professor of
Comparative Education at Hiroshima University in
the Center for the Study of International
Cooperation in Education. He holds a Ph.D. from
Kyushu University. His research and publications
focus on Islamic education in developing countries,
especially Bangladesh, and also on the use of the
Japanese lesson study method in other countries.
Yoshiyuki Tanaka is an Associate Professor of
Labor Economics at Kobe University where he
obtained his MA and Ph.D. His research focuses
mainly on the problem of Japanese NEETs (those
Not in Employment, Education or Training), includ­
ing the reasons that prolong it.
The Lesson Study method initiated in Japan has
been a particular interest of Hiroshima
University’s Center for International Cooperation
in Education. Lesson study has in recent decades
spread to many countries, including Vietnam, in
an attempt to improve both teaching quality and
student performance on cognitive skills, typically
in specific subject areas. A relatively neglected
aspect of lesson study, however, is its impact also
on students’ non-cognitive skills and on students’
interactions with their teachers and parents. This
research on a small sample and on a small
number of non-cognitive skills suggests that such
impacts do indeed occur in rural Vietnam, and
paves the way for broader research into causation
and into the relationship between lesson study
and other non-cognitive skills.

© 2022 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons
Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.

Page 1 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

lesson study at the lower secondary level may lead to improved academic out­
comes at the upper secondary and higher education levels as well as improved life
outcomes including behavioral and labor market outcomes.

Subjects: Educational Research; Education Studies; Secondary Education; Teachers &

Teacher Education

Keywords: Secondary education; lesson study; non-cognitive skills; T-test; Vietnam

1. Introduction
Jugyou kenkyuu (lesson study) has been established for over a hundred years in Japan for teacher
professional development, initially at the primary level and slightly later at the lower secondary
level (Arani et al., 2010). Lesson study professional development involves both collaborative
teacher learning and individual teacher development (Perry & Lewis, 2009), pedagogical skills
(Cerbin & Kopp, 2006) and pedagogical reform (Saito & Atencio, 2013). The major steps are
a. collaboratively planning the study lesson; b. implementing the study lesson; c. discussing the
study lesson; d. revising the lesson plan (optional); e. teaching the revised version of the lesson
(optional); and f. sharing thoughts about the revised version (Fernandez & Yoshida, 2004).

The lesson study provided by teachers in Japan has been more successful at the primary school
level than at the secondary level for several reasons. The main reason is that secondary school
involves specialized subjects with different teachers for each subject and the teachers believe that
they can share among themselves the main points of lesson study, in terms of both teaching
materials and techniques, rather than practicing lesson study with the participation of all the
teachers in a school (Tsukui & Murase, 2019). Practicing lesson study has strengthened the
teaching of mathematics via three pathways to instructional improvement: teachers’ knowledge,
teachers’ commitment and community, and learning resources such as books and materials (Lewis
et al., 2006). Stigler and Hiebert (1999) also noted that a substantial goal of lesson study is to
improve students’ learning achievement, stimulating their interest in mathematics and developing
their ability to add unlike fractions (those with different denominators).

Since the 1990s, lesson study has also influenced western countries such as the US, the UK and
Australia. In the US, when teachers use high-quality curricula, school-based lesson study using
Japanese teacher manuals has significantly developed teachers’ knowledge and thus led to
improved student mathematics learning outcomes (C. C. Lewis et al., 2012). Similarly, in the UK,
lesson study has successfully improved professional knowledge and practice among primary
school teachers and school leaders in both math and English (Dudley, 2012). Groves et al. (2013)
implemented lesson study for both mathematics lessons and professional learning in Australia. As
in Japan, lesson study in Australia requires genuine teacher-researcher collaboration and the
involvement of specific outside experts, including typically educational consultants, district per­
sonnel, and university educators.

Globally, lesson study has been shown to develop higher student academic performance in mathe­
matics (Alamri, 2020; Bruce et al., 2016; Dudley et al., 2019; Lewis & Perry, 2017), English language
learning (Kıncal et al., 2019) and reading comprehension (Özdemir, 2019), as well as learning among
students from disadvantaged groups (Churches, 2016). The impact of lesson study on student aca­
demic outcomes is mainly measured in three ways: a. testing before and after lesson study;
b. interviewing students and teachers about positive changes—and in some cases tracking these
over time; and c. more recently, conducting large scale randomized control trials (Churches, 2016).

Lesson study first influenced Anglophone countries, as noted above, but has subsequently
spread also to several Asian countries, notably China, South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia, Vietnam,
Hong Kong, Singapore and Thailand. In Asia, especially after the Asian economic crisis of the late

Page 2 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

1990s, lesson study has focused on broader educational issues, including family problems, drop­
out, and delinquency among children. Indeed the Asian economic crisis has led to lesson study
moving to pay attention to school reforms that improve children’s well-being and learning (Saito
et al., 2015). Japan also has experienced a drastic change as a result of this, with positive results
such as reduced dropout, more attention to learning, and remarkable increases in test scores
(Tsukui & Murase, 2019).

Previous lesson study research has only looked at teachers’ knowledge development or at
students’ academic performance as reflected in cognitive skills, even though children’s wellbeing
also depends very significantly on children’s non-cognitive skills. Much of the previous research has
not been sufficiently rigorous for its results to be certain, however. Nonetheless, according to key
literature reviews of studies published from 2000–2010 (Cheung & Wong, (2014).4) and from
2010–2018 (Willems & Bossche, (2019).), the very small number of rigorous studies have indicated
a clear relationship between lesson study and both teacher development and student academic
performance. Lesson study has also proved effective in improving the way teachers handle
students with special needs (Leifler, 2020). More studies are necessary, however, using more
rigorous evaluation techniques such as randomized control trials and blinding.

Globally, non-cognitive skills have been shown to have behavioral outcomes in both school and
the workplace, as demonstrated by studies in psychology, education, and behavioral economics.
Gutman and Schoon (2013) argued that non-cognitive skills are more important for young people
than cognitive skills—as non-cognitive skills create the attitudes, behaviors, and strategies that are
in high demand in school and the workplace, including motivation, perseverance, and self-control.
Indeed, there are numerous studies investigating non-cognitive skills and students’ academic
outcomes, as well as their future life outcomes, especially in economics, psychology and educa­
tion. Very interestingly, there are some studies in the US that suggest that, for adolescents,
teachers have more of an impact on non-cognitive than on cognitive skills (Jackson, 2012;
Tough, 2013) but this was not found in the Young Lives study of the lasting effect of teachers in
Ethiopia and Vietnam (Crawfurd & Rolleston, 2020).

The well-known evidence from the High Scope Perry preschool program in the United States
found that non-cognitive skills are formed mainly in early childhood, and that childhood differ­
ences in non-cognitive skills persist into adulthood and determine future socio-economic status (J.
Heckman et al., 2010). Student non-cognitive skills are also more important than cognitive skills in
determining adolescent academic outcomes, behavioral outcomes and labor market outcomes
(J. J. Heckman et al., 2006). More recent research synthesis also involving Heckman has also shown
(a) that non-cognitive skills are important both for academic achievement and for life outcomes
beyond just education; and (b) that though the early years are the most important, nonetheless
non-cognitive skills can change later on as a result of parents, schools and social environments
(Kautz, Heckman, et al., 2014).

Psychologists have developed taxonomies for non-cognitive skills, of which the most common
taxonomy focuses on the Big Five traits known as OCEAN: Openness to Experience,
Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism/Emotional Stability (Costa &
McCrae, 1992). In this study, data were available for two of the five: Conscientiousness and
Extraversion. The American Psychological Association Dictionary defines Conscientiousness as
“the tendency to be organized, responsible and hardworking” and Extraversion as “an orientation
of one’s interests and energies toward the outer world of people rather than the inner world of
subjective experience” (Kautz, Heckman, et al., 2014, p. 15).

At the time the data for our study were collected (2017–18), Vietnam had a total population of
92 million, of whom 22 million were aged under 15. It had achieved significant improvements in
education in terms of both access and quality since its 1986 educational reforms, surprising the
world with its first participation in 2012 in the PISA international assessment of education where it

Page 3 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

scored higher than the OECD average (Patrinos et al., 2018). Indeed, Vietnam now ranks 27th out of
157 countries on the World Bank harmonized learning outcomes scale. Almost all children were
enrolled in primary school and in lower secondary school, and learning levels had been rising.
However, upper secondary school still only enrolled 63% of the relevant age group (the exclusion
of low-income students from upper secondary school may account for the PISA results as PISA is
a school population assessment, not a total population one). The government spent 15% of its
budget on education, equivalent to 4.2% of GDP (IBRD-IDA, 2022; Patrinos et al., 2018)

Despite significant increases in enrolments (from 69% in 2000 to 92% in 2012, for example), the
lower secondary level in Vietnam still faces access and quality challenges, especially in rural areas.
These challenges make it difficult for over a third of Vietnamese to go on to upper secondary and
even fewer go on to higher education, even though the rural-urban education gap has begun to
decline. Moreover, Yarema (2010) describes how lesson study could promote explicit student
understanding of lessons’ content structures, leading not only to students’ academic achievement
but also to students’ non-cognitive skill development. However, there is no existing study that
examines students’ non-cognitive skill development as a result of lesson study activity.
Accordingly, this study focused on the use of lesson study in lower secondary education of
Vietnam as quality assurance for the non-cognitive skills that strongly influence academic
performance.

The organization of this paper is as follows. Section 2 reviews the literature of lesson study and
students’ non-cognitive skills in Vietnam; Section 3 summarizes our data from a questionnaire
completed by lower secondary students; Section 4 describes our methodology and research
methods; Section 5 presents and discusses our analysis of the correlation between lesson study
and students’ non-cognitive skills; and, finally, Section 6 contains our conclusions.

2. Literature review

2.1. Lesson study in Vietnam

Since its education reform, Vietnam has been concerned that students must be capable of active
critical thinking and self-learning rather than rote memorization and passive learning, meaning
that improvements were needed in their questioning, evaluating, generalizing, debating and
analyzing skills (Hong Thanh, 2011). This required teachers to have the skills to promote student-
centered learning (for instance, engaging in thinking, active participation and problem-solving) as
well as implementing a national curriculum reform. As part of this attempt to improve teachers’
pedagogical skills, lesson study from Japan was introduced and applied in Vietnamese schools.
Initially, the Japanese International Cooperation Agency introduced guidelines to strengthen
teaching skills, especially in mathematics and science subjects (Saito, 2012). Subsequently,
Japanese lesson study has been frequently adopted in both primary and secondary schools.
Lewis et al. (2019) noted the four stages of lesson study: Study, Plan, Teach, and Reflect. Study
involves linking teaching and long-term objectives in the light of research and joint studying. Plan
is when teachers prepare by learning deeper subject knowledge and including ideas from students
and colleagues. Teach is when they deliver the lesson and see what students learn and experience
from it. Reflect is when the teachers consider feedback and their own reactions, leading to further
revisions for next time.

There are several analyses of lesson study in Vietnam. Vui (2007) examined the implementation
of lesson study to develop students’ mathematical thinking by solving problems and equipping
primary students with basic mathematical skills using videotaped lessons by senior teachers. There
was some progress in developing students’ mathematical thinking, but teachers still needed
practical lesson frameworks and deeper understanding and longer training in the lesson study
process. Saito et al. (2008) focused on lesson study problems among primary school teachers in
Bac Giang province, where lesson study was conducted by a collaboration between the
Vietnamese and Japanese governments on an in-service teacher-training program. Saito et al.

Page 4 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

found that teachers 1) deliver lesson study sessions very fast, 2) lack teaching skills, and 3) do not
have any dialog with colleagues to discuss and share about teaching methods. Vui (2014)
described a small application of lesson study in mathematics education in one secondary school
in Vietnam. Lesson study resulted in innovations in teaching methods, improved student learning,
improved teacher professional development, and innovations in applying a new curriculum. In
particular, students achieved a better grasp of mathematical concepts by having to come up with
solutions to open-ended questions based on real-life situations.

Interestingly, Van Thang (2018) implemented applying lesson study for both students and
teachers. Students were trained how to teach other students, so that they could acquire academic
knowledge through a teaching mechanism, even though lesson study is normally delivered by
school teachers. Teachers provided lesson study plans and practice methods to the students,
observed the students teaching, and then discussed with them their reflections about their
teaching. Through this type of indirect lesson study carried out by students, teachers could
improve actual teaching skills, adjusting their own lessons in the light of students’ actual knowl­
edge levels and achievements.

Although lesson study has been applied in several ways to develop teaching and learning skills in
Vietnam, there are few analyses of it. Such studies as do exist seem to show similar positive effects
on both teachers’ teaching development and students’ learning development, as do many ana­
lyses of lesson study in other countries. Most analyses in Vietnam (Bruce et al., 2016; Chong et al.,
2017; Duc & Chien, 2014; Kieu, 2018; Lewis & Perry, 2017; Vui, 2014) have focused on student
cognitive skills in subjects like mathematics and science, including an interesting recent paper that
combines lesson study with the micro lesson method for young chemistry teachers in northern
Vietnam (Huong et al., 2021).

Prior studies in Vietnam have thus not focused on student non-cognitive skills through lesson
study as we do. As have previous studies, we also include student cognitive skills and teacher
development, but for a wider range of subjects than have most other studies.

2.2. Students’ non-cognitive skills in Vietnam

Little and Azubuike (2017) investigated the associations between non-cognitive skills and aca­
demic outcomes using exploratory factor analysis in urban and rural areas of Ethiopia, India and
Vietnam. In Vietnam, non-cognitive skills were correlated with personal development, academic
beliefs such as self-efficacy, and positive self-concept (view of oneself) and assessment domina­
tion (when more interested in test scores than in the subject itself) in math and English.

Van Huynh (2019) suggested that social emotional learning, which is part of the non-cognitive
domain, should be embedded in Vietnamese primary classrooms because social emotional skills can
help to solve problematic situations involving students, as well as for many other reasons. Hoang and Vu
(2016) have also emphasized the importance of teaching social and emotional skills to students and
explored its challenges and opportunities in Vietnamese middle schools. Social emotional learning had
benefits for students in terms of sharing thoughts, expressing feelings and having sympathy with peers.
However, there were some challenges, including the frequency of regular learning practice sessions,
difficulties understanding various new concepts in learning and training, and the sustainability of family
commitments to their children’s education. An empirical study by Espinosa (2017) indicated that
educational inputs influenced cognitive and non-cognitive skills in terms of self-esteem and self-
efficacy. The non-cognitive skills were developed by peer relationships and also by the children’s
relationship to their parents and their provision of academic support. The findings recommended
Vietnamese education policies need to incorporate non-cognitive development, with its assessment
linked to school accountability. However, Huynh et al. (2021) listed four social-emotional learning
challenges in Vietnamese secondary education: the disconnect between the curriculum and teachers’
ability to teach; the perception that it is difficult to integrate social-emotional learning into education;

Page 5 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

insufficient attention to student psychology; and students’ inability to develop social-emotional

competence.

The most relevant analysis for this paper (Azubuike & Little, 2019) examined the association
between grade 10 students’ non-cognitive skills (learning motivation and self-concept) and learn­
ing outcomes in both mathematics and English language, also comparing genders (though they
did not look at lesson study). The students’ self-concept is influenced by their judgment regarding
classroom peer relationships. The findings showed that boys had higher levels of self-concept but
less motivation to learn than did girls, and that girls’ higher motivation to learn meant that they
had higher academic scores, a finding consistent with many upper and middle-income countries.

3. Data
As many analyses indicated that non-cognitive skills are strongly correlated with academic
achievement and that the Japanese lesson study method was helping to strengthen teacher
development and students’ academic performance, our study focused on students’ non-
cognitive skills development through lesson study in the Nguyen Truc junior high school in the
Thanh Oai district of Vietnam. The Thanh Oai district is one of several economically emerging cities
near Hanoi City, with new manufacturing and transportation businesses, although it is still sur­
rounded by mainly agricultural areas. This economic development led to a significant increase in
awareness about the importance of education investment to promote education quality in Thanh
Oai as much of the district’s economic growth is effectively related to increased education levels.

Moreover, since 2010, Vietnam has held teaching competitions throughout the country among
teachers at school, province, prefecture and city levels, designed to improve teaching skills and
hence education quality and also to shift teaching away from one-sided lecturing towards inter­
active learning. Many of the teachers taking part in the competitions have adopted the lesson
study process, including several teachers from the Nguyen Truc junior high school who have won
various competitions, despite the school as a whole struggling with low skilled teachers and
continued rote learning. Supported by the principal, the several teachers who won the competi­
tions were extremely keen to use the lesson study process more in their classes and introduce
lesson study throughout the school. They were supported in doing this by cooperative arrange­
ments with the Center for the Study of International Cooperation in Education (CICE) at Hiroshima
University in Japan and the Vietnam National University in Hanoi. Teacher development was seen
as the main purpose of introducing more lesson study processes.

A survey of 72 grade 8 students was conducted by CICE to examine differences before and after
lesson study in 2017–2018 (that only lasted for two months). The survey used a questionnaire that
included cognitive assessments in each subject (mathematics, literature, English, biology, chemistry,
physics, and history) together with non-cognitive assessments of extraversion and conscientiousness
traits. Note the wide range of subjects covered, very different from most previous analyses of lesson
study that have typically been confined to only one subject. The test of extraversion examined the
student’s relationship with the teacher to estimate the student’s communication skills and learning
motivation. The non-cognitive trait of conscientiousness was evaluated by examining how much time
students spent studying on their own outside the classroom. The survey also examined teacher
development as the principal purpose of the typical lesson study, as assessed by teachers’ commit­
ment and involvement with students both inside and outside the classroom.

The main contents of the questionnaire completed by the students were 1) test scores, 2) relation­
ship with the teacher, 3) student study effort, 4) the teacher’s understanding of the student’s
comprehension, 5) and 6) the teacher’s engagement with the student inside and outside the class­
room, and 7) parental involvement (see the Appendix). Figures 1–7 provide an overview of the data
obtained, including average values for the indicators of students’ cognitive and non-cognitive skill
development as well as of teachers’ pedagogical development, before and after lesson study.

Page 6 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

Figure 1. Data summary of test Test score

scores. 5.0

4.9 Math

4.8 Literature
English
4.7
Biology
4.6 Chemistry
Physics
4.5
History
4.4
Before After

Figure 2. Data summary of Relationship with teacher

relationships with teachers. 4.3

4.2
Math
4.1 Literature
4.0 English
Biology
3.9
Chemistry
3.8
Physics
3.7 History
3.6
B ef o r e Aft e r

Figure 3. Data summary of stu­ Study Time

dent study effort.
4.5

4.0 Math
Literature
3.5
English
Biology
3.0
Chemistry
Physics
2.5
History

2.0
B ef o r e After

To organize the data, we first summarized the students’ responses about themselves in
Figures 1–3. Figure 1 shows their academic performance before and after lesson study in terms
of cognitive skills in seven subjects. The data reported in the questionnaire show (a) very high
scores on all subjects except Literature even before lesson study; and (b) no major improvements
in cognitive skills as a result of lesson study. While there was a minor improvement in Biology,

Page 7 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

Figure 4. Data summary of tea­ Teacher’s understanding of student’s comprehension

chers’ understanding of stu­
4.5
dents’ comprehension.
4.4
4.3 Math

4.2 Literature

4.1 English

4.0 Biology
3.9 Chemistry
3.8 Physics
3.7 History
3.6
Before After

Figure 5. Data summary of tea­ Teachers' engagement in the classroom

chers’ engagement. 4.3
4.2
4.1 Math
4.0 Literature
3.9 English

3.8 Biology

3.7 Chemistry
Physics
3.6
History
3.5
3.4
Before After

Figure 6. Data summary of tea­ Teachers' engagement outside the classroom

chers’ engagement. 3.9

3.8
Math
3.7
Literature
3.6 English
Biology
3.5
Chemistry
3.4 Physics

3.3 History

3.2
Before After

History, Math, Physics and Literature, there was also a minor decline in both Chemistry and English
(Statistical analysis of the results is presented in section 4. 1).

The most important data used in this study are presented in Figures 2 and 3, that provide
indicators of the non-cognitive trait of conscientiousness. Figure 2 explains the students’ closeness

Page 8 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

Figure 7. Data summary of par­ Parental involvement

ental involvement. 4.2

4.0

3.8
Homework
3.6
Speak with teachers
Checking exam results
3.4

3.2

3.0
Before After

to their class teacher for each subject. The data show that this closeness greatly increased in all
subjects after lesson study, though this was very minor for Physics. Note that this is not yet an
analytical result but a presentation of the data.

Figure 3 describes how the students’ behavior changed in terms of their effort, measured by the
hours per week they spent studying for each subject. Study time increased moderately for most
subjects after lesson study, though not for Literature or Physics.

After organizing the data about students in Figures 1–3, we then organized the data about
teachers in Figures 4–6 to prepare to investigate teachers’ skill development as a result of lesson
study. Figure 4 reports the extent that teachers notice how much students understand lesson
contents for each subject. Except for Physics, the teachers’ understanding of students’ compre­
hension increased considerably after lesson study in almost every subject, and especially in Math
and Chemistry.

Similar to Figures 4–6 report data on teacher skill development in terms of teachers’ interactive
communication with students, inside and outside the classroom. This was very noticeable inside
the classroom in all subjects except Physics and outside the classroom for all subjects, though
least so for Physics and Literature. Generally, the results for Physics and Literature in Figures 1–6
are not as good as those for other subjects. This possibly implies less interest in lesson study by the
teachers of those two subjects.

Finally, we organized the questionnaire responses about parents’ attitudes to support their
children’s education. This included such things as providing advice, checking homework and test
results, and communicating with their children and the school teachers and principal. The data are
summarized in Figure 7. Lesson study improved parental involvement with respect to all these
dimensions.

4. Methodology
Several studies (e.g., Angeles & Matsuura, 2019; Fadillah et al., 2017) have used the t-test to
analyze the quantitative relationship between lesson study and students’ academic performance
and between lesson study and teacher development—and we continue this analysis. However,
until our study, no quantitative analysis had been conducted into the relationship between lesson
study and students’ non-cognitive skills. In sum, therefore, we employed the t-test statistical
method to understand the overall relationships between lesson study and students’ cognitive
skills, between lesson study and students’ non-cognitive skills and between lesson study and
teacher development, using a before and after lesson study comparison of the indicators of the

Page 9 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

average values shown above in Figures 1–7. Specifically, using the paired t-test method, we
conducted a t-test to determine whether or not there was an improvement in the index of each
questionnaire item by focusing on the difference (d: difference) between the mean value of each
questionnaire item for the same group of students before and after their teachers took the lesson
study.

The paired t-test method can be written as follows:

� ¼ 1 ∑n x �
H0 ðNull hypothesisÞ: (d n i¼1 i;After xi;Before � 0)

� ¼ 1 ∑n x �
H1 ðalternative hypothesisÞ: (d n i¼1 i;After xi;Before >0)

where H0 means that there were no indicators improved by lesson study and H1 means that
some indicators were improved by lesson study.

The test for these hypotheses is given by the following test statistics
� μ
d
t¼ pffiffiffi (1)
sd = n

where d � is the mean of the differences between before and after for each item, and s is the
d
sample standard deviation of those differences. Moreover μ is the mean of the population, so if H0
is correct, μ ¼ 0, and we can rewrite Equation 1) as follows:
�
d
t¼ pffiffiffi (2)
sd = n

We also estimated whether or not lesson study had an effect on the improvement of each item by
conducting a one tailed t-test.

5. Results and discussion

5.1. Students’ cognitive skills

Table 1 employs the t-test method to examine the students’ academic performance on their year-
end examination score to show student’s cognitive skills in 7 academic subjects after lesson study.
A significant change appeared only in History, statistically at the 10% significance level; other
subjects showed no significant differences, and the mean values in English and in Chemistry even
decreased after lesson study. We double-checked this result using one-tailed and two tailed tests.
With both there is no statistical significance, so it is difficult to say if the students’ cognitive skills
decreased or increased through lesson study. This finding is that lesson study did not improve
students’ academic performance in Vietnam. This result is different from many previous studies
that showed higher academic performance in mathematics, English, language learning and read­
ing comprehension (Alamri, 2020; Bruce et al., 2016; Dudley et al., 2019; Lewis & Perry, 2017;
Özdemir, 2019). However, this is probably because students’ test scores in our sample were already
relatively high before lesson study (see, Figure 1) and therefore grade 8 students would have found
it difficult to improve their exam scores quickly or easily during the short-term lesson study project
(that only lasted for two months). Lesson study may not have any very short-term impact on
students’ academic performance in lower secondary school, especially when students are already
performing well, considering also that Arani et al. (2010) have argued that lesson study functions
best in the lower grades of primary school.

5.2. Students’ non-cognitive skills

Tables 2 and 3 report estimates of students’ non-cognitive traits in extraversion and conscien­
tiousness in terms of building a good relationship with the teacher and of spontaneous learning
motivation as indicated by increased study time after the lesson study. Table 2 presents how good

Page 10 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

Table 1. Test scores

Subject Obs. Before After t-value Pr(T > t)
Math 72 4.931 4.931 0.000 0.500
(0.256) (0.306)
Literature 71 4.465 4.479 0.207 0.418
(0.581) (0.531)
English 70 4.871 4.843 −0.469 0.680
(0.337) (0.404)
Biology 66 4.985 5.000 1.000 0.161
(0.123) (0.000)
Chemistry 21 4.952 4.905 −1.000 0.835
(0.218) (0.301)
Physics 70 4.943 4.957 0.376 0.354
(0.234) (0.204)
History 71 4.958 4.986 1.424 0.079 *
(0.203) (0.119)
***, ** and * indicate significance at 1%, 5% and 10% levels.

Table 2. Relationship with the teacher

Subject Obs. Before After t-value Pr(T > t)
Math 71 3.958 4.225 2.914 0.002 ***
(0.963) (1.045)
Literature 72 4.042 4.153 1.070 0.144
(0.956) (1.002)
English 72 3.653 4.028 3.436 0.001 ***
(1.009) (1.126)
Biology 72 3.667 3.847 1.558 0.062 *
(0.964) (1.044)
Chemistry 47 3.915 4.191 2.049 0.023 **
(1.018) (1.056)
Physics 72 3.889 3.944 0.483 0.316
(0.865) (1.086)
History 72 3.806 3.972 1.797 0.038 **
(0.866) (0.949)
***, ** and * indicate significance at 1%, 5% and 10% levels.

was the relationship between students and teachers for all seven subjects, reflecting a 5-point
scale within the questionnaire (see Appendix). There is a statistically significant improvement in
the relationship between students and teachers in all subjects except Literature and Physics
(though the sample size for Chemistry was much lower than for all other subjects). Table 3
demonstrates students’ non-cognitive skills development as indicated by increasing their study
hours by themselves. The increased study hour intervals in the survey were: 1. zero, 2. 0.5–1 hour,
3. 1–1.5 hours, 4. 1.5–2 hours, and 5. more than 2 hours. Most students studied for a longer time
than before lesson study. However, this result is statistically significant for Mathematics, English,
Biology and Chemistry but not for other subjects. This result is similar to the other non-cognitive
skill test in Table 2 that showed the relationship with the teacher for each subject.

Page 11 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

Table 3. Study time

Subject Obs. Before After t-value Pr(T > t)
Math 70 3.743 3.971 1.730 0.044 **
(1.099) (1.063)
Literature 69 3.087 3.145 0.369 0.357
(1.160) (1.204)
English 70 2.771 3.086 2.019 0.024 **
(1.066) (1.164)
Biology 70 2.200 2.400 1.330 0.094 *
(0.910) (1.134)
Chemistry 50 2.900 3.240 2.151 0.018 **
(0.953) (1.135)
Physics 69 2.710 2.754 0.249 0.402
(0.909) (1.230)
History 69 2.130 2.290 0.992 0.162
(0.856) (1.189)
***, ** and * indicate significance at 1%, 5% and 10% levels.

Our first major new finding is thus that lesson study is an important factor for student non-
cognitive skill development, and not only for teacher development as most previous literature has
investigated. Lesson study has the capacity to improve student non-cognitive skills (related to 21st
century skills as strongly stressed by Gutman and Schoon (2013)). This is very important and
implies that lesson study may increasingly be an important factor not only for academic outcomes
but also for future employment outcomes, in line with J. Heckman et al. (2010). The two non-
cognitive traits we examined and found to be of great significance were extraversion (looking at
the student relationship with the teacher through the frequency of student-teacher dialogue) and
conscientiousness (by looking at the time the student spent studying). Consistent with the results
concerning adolescents’ non-cognitive skills found by Jackson (2012) and Tough (2013), our study
also identified a significant impact on the non-cognitive skills of grade 8 students, i.e. those in their
last year of junior secondary school. This suggests that lesson study could help achieve higher
student motivation through improved extraversion and conscientiousness; in turn, this could well
lead to greater academic achievement in upper secondary school when longer time horizons are
considered than in our study.

5.3. Teacher development

Tables 4–6 present the results for teacher development through lesson study. Table 4 describes the
results of the teacher’s understanding of what the student knows in the subject, before and after lesson
study. There is evidence that teachers’ understanding of student knowledge in their lessons increased
considerably, a statistically significant result in Math, English, Biology, Chemistry and History. Tables 5
and 6 present the results concerning teacher engagement with students inside and outside the class­
room, indicators of interactive teaching. The teacher’s engagement skills during lessons (Table 5)
improved considerably in most subjects—except Literature and Physics. The results concerning the
teacher’s engagement skills outside the lesson (Table 6) are almost the same as those during the
lesson, except that, interestingly, the result for Literature is now statistically significant.

We also found that lesson study had a significant effect on teacher performance: better under­
standing what their students know, together with more proactive engagement both inside and
outside the classroom. These findings are consistent with previous research (Alamri, 2020; Dudley
et al., 2019; Lewis & Perry, 2017), and the findings reinforce what is known about the effect of lesson
study on teacher development. We do not have enough data to understand why the results are

Page 12 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

Table 4. Teacher’s understanding of student’s comprehension

Subject Obs. Before After t-value Pr(T > t)
Math 72 4.083 4.444 3.866 0.000 ***
(0.818) (0.729)
Literature 72 4.111 4.208 1.021 0.155
(0.779) (0.821)
English 72 3.944 4.111 1.424 0.079 *
(0.785) (1.056)
Biology 72 3.694 3.931 1.950 0.028 **
(0.781) (0.969)
Chemistry 47 3.957 4.362 3.163 0.001 ***
(0.859) (0.819)
Physics 72 4.014 3.972 −0.370 0.644
(0.760) (1.034)
History 72 3.792 3.972 1.686 0.048 **
(0.749) (0.839)
***, ** and * indicate significance at 1%, 5% and 10% levels.

Table 5. Teacher’s engagement in the classroom

Subject Obs. Before After t-value Pr(T > t)
Math 72 3.625 4.153 4.449 0.000 ***
(0.956) (0.914)
Literature 72 3.792 3.847 0.456 0.325
(0.978) (1.083)
English 71 3.676 3.901 1.867 0.033 **
(0.953) (1.136)
Biology 72 3.514 3.889 2.945 0.002 ***
(0.949) (1.001)
Chemistry 47 3.809 4.191 2.778 0.004 **
(1.035) (0.900)
Physics 71 3.775 3.845 0.540 0.296
(0.898) (1.009)
History 72 3.597 3.833 1.976 0.026 **
(0.883) (0.964)
***, ** and * indicate significance at 1%, 5% and 10% levels.

different for Literature and Physics but can speculate that possibly the teachers of these subjects were
less motivated about lesson study than were teachers of other subjects.
5.4. Parental engagement
Table 7 shows that Vietnamese parents put a great effort into their children’s education.

As a result of lesson study, parents increased the attention they paid to check their children’s
homework and examination results, and also spoke more frequently with their children’s teachers.
All these parental involvement findings are statistically significant. While straightforward, this is
another important finding of our study, as no previous studies have looked at the impact of lesson
study on parental engagement.

Page 13 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

Table 6. Teacher’s engagement outside the classroom

Subject Obs. Before After t-value Pr(T > t)
Math 71 3.324 3.732 3.278 0.001 ***
(0.982) (1.082)
Literature 71 3.408 3.718 2.239 0.014 **
(1.036) (1.197)
English 72 3.236 3.694 3.126 0.001 ***
(1.028) (1.229)
Biology 71 3.254 3.620 2.576 0.006 ***
(0.952) (1.113)
Chemistry 46 3.478 3.783 1.532 0.066 *
(1.110) (1.094)
Physics 71 3.408 3.577 0.993 0.162
(0.979) (1.191)
History 72 3.347 3.708 2.549 0.007 ***
(0.952) (1.027)
***, ** and * indicate significance at 1%, 5% and 10% levels.

Table 7. Parental engagement

Obs Before After t-value Pr(T > t)
Parental
involvement of
Home 68 3.397 3.735 2.226 0.015 **

(1.108) (1.141)

School 68 3.074 3.485 2.989 0.002 ***

(1.012) (1.000)

Exam 68 3.912 4.132 1.590 0.058 *

(1.018) (0.945)

Parental 68 4.250 4.294 0.340 0.368

Satisfaction of
school
(0.853) (0.882)

6. Conclusions
This study has drawn on survey data about lesson study in a rural part of the Thanh Oai district of
Vietnam to investigate student non-cognitive skills development through lesson study along with
student cognitive skills development and teacher development. Specifically, this study has
addressed student non-cognitive skills development in terms of student’s extraversion and con­
scientiousness traits (two of the Big 5 traits), student cognitive skills with exam results, changes in
teacher development, and changes in parental engagement.

Overall our results demonstrate a strong effect of lesson study in improving three important
aspects of lower secondary school education: 1) student non-cognitive skills development, 2)
teacher development, and 3) parental engagement. We did not, however, find an effect on
students’ academic achievement as had several previous researchers investigated (Arani et al.,
2010; Cerbin & Kopp, 2006; Perry & Lewis, 2009; Saito & Atencio, 2013). Additionally, Arani et al.
(2010) found that lesson study is more consequential for students at the primary education

Page 14 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

level. Nonetheless, our study found important new results: that lesson study could improve
students’ non-cognitive skills at the lower secondary education level as well as increase par­
ental engagement, aspects not previously studied. This provides a good starting point for further
research on the impact of lesson study on student non-cognitive skills, especially at the lower
secondary education level. Non-cognitive skills have been shown by Kautz, Heckman, et al.
(2014) to be very important to improve both academic achievement and life outcomes.
Improving non-cognitive skills through lesson study activity at the lower secondary level may
well have implications, therefore, for academic outcomes at the upper secondary and higher
education levels as well as for life outcomes including behavioral and labor market outcomes,
as mentioned by J. J. Heckman et al. (2006).

However, future research should consider more carefully the causal effects of lesson study
on students’ skills development. A limitation of our study, for example, is that our small data
sample does not permit us to analyze these causal effects. Nor do we look at all five of the
widely accepted Big 5 non-cognitive traits—future research could usefully add Openness to
Experience, Agreeableness and Neuroticism/Emotional Stability to our studied traits of
Conscientiousness and Extraversion. A further limitation is the very short period of only two
months between the before and after measurements of skills. Finally, it is only a study of one
school in one district and needs to be supplemented with analyses of more schools in more
districts, including schools whose students were not performing so well in advance of the
introduction of lesson study. To the best of our knowledge, no analysis has been made in
Vietnam of the costs of introducing lesson study or of the best ways to do it. Such research
would also be very valuable.

Without such further analyses, it is difficult to draw broad policy implications for Vietnam. Our
results suggest, however, that lesson study can improve non-cognitive skills at the upper second­
ary level. More work is needed into whether or not it can improve cognitive skills, a finding of some
other studies but not of ours.

Funding
This research was supported by the Japan Society for the
Promotion of Science, grant number [18H03661] to the
Center for the Study of International Cooperation in
Education at Hiroshima Universit.
Author details
Seonkyung Choi1
E-mail: skchoi@hiroshima-u.ac.jp
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6963-0906
Tatsuya Kusakabe2
E-mail: kusakabe@hiroshima-u.ac.jp
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7217-2600
Yoshiyuki Tanaka3
E-mail: yoshi.tanaka@econ.kobe-u.ac.jp
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5804-5936
1
Global Career Design Center, Hiroshima University,
Hiroshima, Japan.
2
Center for the Study of International Cooperation in
Education, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
3
Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University, Kobe,
Japan.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
author(s).
Citation information
Cite this article as: Enhancing non-cognitive skills by
applying lesson study in lower secondary education:
A project in Vietnam, Seonkyung Choi, Tatsuya Kusakabe
& Yoshiyuki Tanaka, Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091.
References
Alamri, N. M. (2020). The implementation of the lesson
study strategy in teaching mathematics: Teachers’
perspectives. Education Research International,
2020(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/
1683758
Angeles, D., & Matsuura, T. (2019). Successes and
challenges in lesson study of science teachers in
Fukuyama City, Japan. PUPIL: International Journal
of Teaching, Education and Learning, 3(3), 15–24.
https://doi.org/10.20319/pijtel.2019.33.206215
Arani, M. R. S., Fukuya, K., & Lassegard, J. P. (2010).
“Lesson Study” as professional culture in Japanese
schools: An historical perspective on elementary
classroom practices. Japan Review, 22, 171–200.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/25791346
Azubuike, O. B., & Little, A. W. (2019). Learning motiva­
tions, learning outcomes and gender in Vietnam.
Young Lives Working Papers (Issue 181).
Bruce, C. D., Flynn, T. C., & Bennett, S. (2016). A focus on
exploratory tasks in lesson study: The Canadian
‘Math for Young Children’ project. ZDM - Mathematics
Education, 48(4), 541–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11858-015-0747-7
Cerbin, W., & Kopp, B. (2006). Lesson study as a model for
building pedagogical knowledge and improving
teaching. International Journal of Teaching and
Learning in Higher Education, 18(3), 250–257. https://
files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1068058.pdf
Cheung, M.W., & Wong, Y.W. (2014). Does Lesson Study
work? A systematic review on the effects of Lesson
Study and Learning Study on teachers and students
International Journal of Lesson and Learning Studies

Page 15 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091
3 (2) 137–149. http://doi/org/10.1108/IJLLS-05-2013-
0024
Chong, S. Y. J., Herng Han, S., Azura Abdullah, N., Siew
Fang Chong, M., Widjaja, W., & Shahrill, M. (2017).
Utilizing lesson study in improving year 12 students’
learning and performance in mathematics.
Mathematics Education Trends and Research, 2017
(1), 24–31. https://doi.org/10.5899/2017/metr-00095
Churches, Richard. (2016). Closing the gap: test and learn.
National College for Teaching & Leadership.)https://
www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/495580/closing_the_gap_test_
and_learn_full_report.pdf
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Four ways five factors
are not basic. Personality and Individual Differences,
13(6), 667–673. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-
8869(92)90236-I
Crawfurd, L., & Rolleston, C. (2020). Long-run effects of
teachers in developing countries. Review of
Development Economics, 24(4), 1279–1299. https://
doi.org/10.1111/rode.12717
Duc, N. M., & Chien, H. T. (2014). Renovating the profes­
sional activities of teachers through the model of
“lesson study” in Vietnam. Vietnam Journal of
Education, 335(1), 36–39.
Dudley, P. (2012). Lesson study development in England:
From school networks to national policy. Lesson
Study, 1(1), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.1108/
20468251211179722
Dudley, P., Xu, H., Vermunt, J. D., & Lang, J. (2019).
Empirical evidence of the impact of lesson study on
students’ achievement, teachers’ professional learn­
ing and on institutional and system evolution.
European Journal of Education, 54(2), 202–217.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12337
Espinosa, A. M. G. (2017). Estimating the education pro­
duction function for cognitive and non-cognitive
development of children in Vietnam through struc­
tural equation modelling using young lives data base
estimating the education production function for
cognitive and non-cognitive. University College
London. https://www.younglives.org.uk/content/esti
mating-education-production-function-cognitive-
and-non-cognitive-development-children
Fadillah, A., Dewi, N. P. L. C., Ridho, D., Majid, A. N., &
Prastiwi, M. N. B. (2017). The effect of application of
contextual teaching and learning (CTL) model-based
on lesson study with mind mapping media to assess
student learning outcomes on chemistry on colloid
systems. International Journal of Science and Applied
Science: Conference Series, 1(2), 101. https://doi.org/
10.20961/ijsascs.v1i2.5128
Fernandez, C., & Yoshida, M. (2004). Lesson study:
A Japanese approach to improving mathematics
teaching and learning (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.
org/10.4324/9781410610867
Groves, S., Doig, B., Widjaja, W., Garner, D., & Palmer, K.
(2013). Implementing Japanese lesson study: An
example of teacher-researcher collaboration.
Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers, 69
(3), 10–17. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1093099
Gutman, L. M., & Schoon, I. (2013). The impact of non-
cognitive skills on outcomes for young people.
London: Education Endowment Foundation (Issue
November). https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/
10125763
Heckman, J. J., Stixrud, J., & Urzua, S. (2006). The effects
of cognitive and noncognitive abilities on labor mar­
ket outcomes and social behavior. Journal of Labor
Economics, 24(3), 411–482. https://doi.org/10.1086/
504455
Heckman, J., Moon, S. H., Pinto, R., Savelyev, P., & Yavitz, A.
(2010). Analyzing social experiments as implemen­
ted: Evidence from the highscope perry preschool
program Quantitative Economics, 11, 1–46. doi: .
https://doi.org/10.3982/QE8
Hoang, K., & Vu, T. Q. (2016). Teaching social and emo­
tional skills to students in Vietnam: Challenges and
opportunities teaching. AsTen Journal of Teacher
Education, 1(1), 10 https://po.pnuresearchportal.org/
ejournal/index.php/asten/article/view/144.
Hong Thanh, P. T. (2011). Doi Moi (Renovation) and higher
education reform in Vietnam. International Journal of
Educational Reform, 20(3), 210–225. https://doi.org/
10.1177/105678791102000302
Huong, L. T. T., Thi, N., Thi, N., & Mau, N. (2021). Applying
the lesson study model in developing teaching cap­
ability for young teachers in Vietnam. European
Journal of Educational Research, 10(4), 1755–1768.
https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.10.4.1755
Huynh, V. S., Giang, T. V., Nguyen, T. T., & Dinh, D. H.
(2021). Exploring the challenges of social-emotional
learning integration in secondary schools:
A phenomenological research in Vietnam. Psychology
Research and Behavior Management, 14, 621–635.
https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S300748
IBRD-IDA. (2022). Education statistics. The World Bank.
https://databank.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.XPD.
TOTL.GB.ZS?id=c755d342&report_name=EdStats_
Indicators_Report&populartype=series
Jackson, C. K. (2012). Non-cognitive ability, test scores,
and teacher quality: Evidence from 9th grade teachers
in North Carolina. NBER Working Paper No. 18624.
http://www.nber.org/papers/w18624
Kautz, T., Heckman, J., Diris, R., Ter Weel, B., &
Borghans, L. (2014). Fostering and measuring skills :
Improving cognitive and non-cognitive skills to pro­
mote lifetime success. OECD (Issue 110). https://doi.
org/10.1787/19939019
Kieu, N. T. (2018). Using lesson study to develop the
competence of designing math lesson plan for pri­
mary education students at Dong Thap university.
Vietnam Journal of Education, 2(2018), 61–65.
https://tapchigiaoduc.moet.gov.vn/vi/magazine/
volume-2-march-2018/12-using-lesson-study-to-
develop-the-competence-of-designing-math-lesson-
plan-for-primary-education-students-at-dong-thap-
university-5839.html
Kıncal, R. Y., Ozan, C., & İleritürk, D. (2019). Increasing
Students’ English language learning levels via lesson
study. English Language Teaching, 12(9), 88–95.
https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n9p88
Leifler Emma. (2020). Teachers' capacity to create inclu­
sive learning environments. International Journal for
Lesson and Learning Studies, 9(3), 221–244. 10.1108/
IJLLS-01-2020-0003
Lewis, C., Perry, R., Hurd, J., & O’Connell, M. P. (2006).
Lesson study comes of age in North America. Phi
Delta Kappan, 88(4), 273–281. https://doi.org/10.
1177/003172170608800406
Lewis, C. C., Perry, R. R., Friedkin, S., & Roth, J. R. (2012).
Improving teaching does improve teachers: Evidence
from lesson study. Journal of Teacher Education, 63
(5), 368–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0022487112446633
Lewis, C., & Perry, R. (2017). Lesson study to scale up
research-based knowledge: A randomized, controlled
trial of fractions learning. Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, 48(3), 261–299. https://doi.
org/10.5951/jresematheduc.48.3.0261
Lewis, C., Friedkin, S., Emerson, K., Henn, L., &
Goldsmith, L. (2019). How does lesson study work?
Page 16 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091
Toward a theory of lesson study process and impact.
In R. Huang, A. Takahashi, & J. P. da Ponte (Eds.),
Theory and practice of lesson study in mathematics:
An international perspective (pp. 13–37). Springer.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-
3-030-04031-4_2#citeas
Little, A. W., & Azubuike, O. B. (2017). Young Lives School
Surveys 2016-17: The Development of Non-Cognitive
Instruments in Ethiopia, India and Vietnam (Issue
September) Young Lives . https://www.younglives.org.
uk/content/young-lives-school-surveys-2016–17-
development-non-cognitive-instruments-ethiopia-india
-and
Özdemir, S. M. (2019). Implementation of the lesson
study as a tool to improve students’ learning and
professional development of teachers. Participatory
Educational Research, 6(1), 36–53. https://doi.org/10.
17275/per.19.4.6.1
Patrinos, H. A., Thang, P. V., & Thanh, N. D. T. (2018). The
economic case for education in Vietnam. Policy
Research Working Paper (No. WPS8679). https://papers.
ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?Abstract_id=3303596
Perry, R. R., & Lewis, C. C. (2009). What is successful
adaptation of lesson study in the US? Journal of
Educational Change, 10(4), 365–391. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10833-008-9069-7
Saito, E., Tsukui, A., & Tanaka, Y. (2008). Problems on
primary school-based in-service training in
Vietnam: A case study of Bac Giang province.
International Journal of Educational Development,
28(1), 89–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.
2007.08.001
Saito, E. (2012). Strategies to promote lesson study in
developing countries. International Journal of
Educational Management, 26(6), 565–576. https://doi.
org/10.1108/09513541211251398
Saito, E., & Atencio, M. (2013). A conceptual discussion
of lesson study from a micro-political perspective:
Implications for teacher development and pupil
learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 31(1),
87–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.01.001
Saito, E., Watanabe, M., Gillies, R., Someya, I., Nagashima, T.,
Sato, M., & Murase, M. (2015). School reform for positive
behaviour support through collaborative learning:
Utilising lesson study for a learning community.
Cambridge Journal of Education, 45(4), 489–518.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2014.988684
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best
ideas from the world’s teachers for improving educa­
tion in the classroom. The Free Press.
Tough, P. (2013). How children succeed: Grit, curiosity, and
the hidden power of character. Houghton Mifflin
Harcourt.
Tsukui, A., & Murase, M. (Eds.). (2019). Lesson study and
schools as learning communities: Asian school reform
in theory and practice (1st ed.). Routledge. https://
www.routledge.com/Lesson-Study-and-Schools-as-
Learning-Communities-Asian-School-Reform-in
/Tsukui-Murase/p/book/9780367484163
Van Huynh, S. (2019). Embedding social emotional
learning core content into life-skills instruction for
Vietnamese primary students. International Journal
of Educational Sciences, 24(1–3), 1–7. https://doi.org/
10.31901/24566322.2019/24.1-3.1067
Van Thang, H. (2018). Applying micro – teaching and
Jugyou Kenkyuu (Lesson Study) to enhance students
’ teaching skills through the module of geopraphy
teaching. Ho Chi Minh City University of Education
Journal of Science, 15(5b), 105–116. http://journal.
hcmue.edu.vn/index.php/hcmuejos/article/view/115
Vui, T. (2007). A lesson that may develop mathematical
thinking of primary students in Vietnam: Find two
numbers that their sum and a restricted contition
are known. In Proceedings of APEC International
Symposium on Innovative Teaching Mathematics
through Lesson Study 2 - Focusing on Mathematical
Thinking. Khon Kaen Session, Thailand (pp.
190–201). http://www.crme.kku.ac.th/APEC/
PDF2007/TranVui.pdf
Vui, T. (2014). Lesson study as a means to innovation for
good practices in teaching and learning mathematics
in Vietnam. VNU Journal of Science: Education
Research, 30(4), 31–40. https://js.vnu.edu.vn/ER/arti
cle/download/302/288.
Willems, Iris, & Bossche, Piet Van den (2019). Lesson
Study effectiveness for teachers’ professional learn­
ing: a best evidence synthesis. International Journal
for Lesson and Learning Studies 8 (4) 257–271. http://
doi/org/10.1108/IJLLS-04-2019-0031
Yarema, C. H. (2010). Mathematics teachers ’ views of
accountability testing revealed through lesson
study. Mathematics Teacher Education and
Development, 12 (1) , 3–18. https://files.eric.ed.gov/
fulltext/EJ914338.pdf.
Page 17 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

Appendix
Questionnaire to Pupils

Name:
Grade:
Gender: □Male □Female

1. Please indicate your score in the yearend exams 2017–18.

Mathematics
□ 8–10 □ 6–7.9 □ 4–5.9 □ 2–3.9 □ 0–1.9

Literature
□ 8–10 □ 6–7.9 □ 4–5.9 □ 2–3.9 □ 0–1.9

English
□ 8–10 □ 6–7.9 □ 4–5.9 □ 2–3.9 □ 0–1.9

Biology
□ 8–10 □ 6–7.9 □ 4–5.9 □ 2–3.9 □ 0–1.9

Chemistry
□ 8–10 □ 6–7.9 □ 4–5.9 □ 2–3.9 □ 0–1.9

Physics
□ 8–10 □ 6–7.9 □ 4–5.9 □ 2–3.9 □ 0–1.9

History
□ 8–10 □ 6–7.9 □ 4–5.9 □ 2–3.9 □ 0–1.9

2. Please rate how much fun you have in each subject

5. Most interest 4. Medium interest 3. Not strongly interested 2. Little interest. 1. No interest

Mathematics
□5 □4 □3 □2 □1

Literature
□5 □4 □3 □2 □1

English
□5 □4 □3 □2 □1

Biology
□5 □4 □3 □2 □1

Chemistry
□5 □4 □3 □2 □1

Physics
□5 □4 □3 □2 □1

History

Page 18 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

□5 □4 □3 □2 □1

3. Please check the box that most closely reflects your opinion about your teacher.

Mathematics

I have a good relationship with my Mathematics teacher.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Mathematics teacher understands what I know.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Mathematics teacher questions and speaks to me frequently in the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Mathematics teacher questions and speaks me frequently outside the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

Literature

I have a good relationship with my Literature teacher.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Literature teacher understands what I know.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Literature teacher questions and speaks to me frequently in the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Literature teacher questions and speaks to me frequently outside the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

English

I have a good relationship with my English teacher.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My English teacher understands what I know.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My English teacher questions and speaks to me frequently in the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My English teacher questions and speaks to me frequently outside the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

Biology

I have a good relationship with my Chemistry teacher.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Chemistry teacher understands what I know.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Chemistry teacher questions and speaks to me frequently in the classroom.

Page 19 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Chemistry teacher questions and speaks to me frequently outside the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

Chemistry

I have a good relationship with my Chemistry teacher.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Chemistry teacher understands what I know.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Chemistry teacher questions and speaks to me frequently in the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Chemistry teacher questions and speaks to me frequently outside the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

Physics

I have a good relationship with my Physics teacher.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Physics teacher understands what I know.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Physics teacher questions and speaks to me frequently in the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My Physics teacher questions and speaks to me frequently outside the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

History

I have a good relationship with my History teacher.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My History teacher understands what I know.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My History teacher questions and speaks to me frequently in the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

My History teacher questions and speaks to me frequently outside the classroom.

□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

4. Please check the box to indicate how many hours you study at home in each subject every day.

Mathematics
□ 2 hours- □ 1.5 hours-2 hours □ 1 hour-1.5 hours □ 30 min-1 hour □0

Page 20 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

Literature
□ 2 hours- □ 1.5 hours-2 hours □ 1 hour-1.5 hours □ 30 min-1 hour □0

English
□ 2 hours- □ 1.5 hours-2 hours □ 1 hour-1.5 hours □ 30 min-1 hour □0

Biology
□ 2 hours- □ 1.5 hours-2 hours □ 1 hour-1.5 hours □ 30 min-1 hour □0

Chemistry
□ 2 hours- □ 1.5 hours-2 hours □ 1 hour-1.5 hours □ 30 min-1 hour □

Physics
□ 2 hours- □ 1.5 hours-2 hours □ 1 hour-1.5 hours □ 30 min-1 hour □0

History
□ 2 hours- □ 1.5 hours-2 hours □ 1 hours-1.5 hours □ 30 min-1 hour □0

5. Please check the box that most closely reflects your opinion about your parents.

Your parents give help or advice when you are doing your homework.
□ Always □ Often □ Sometimes □ Seldom □ Never

Your parents speak with your teachers or the principal.

□ Always □ Often □ Sometimes □ Seldom □ Never

Your parents check the examination scores.

□ Always □ Often □ Sometimes □ Seldom □ Never

You feel your parents are generally satisfied with your school.
□Strongly agree □Agree □Neither disagree nor agree □Disagree □Strongly disagree

Page 21 of 22
Choi et al., Cogent Education (2022), 9: 2082091
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2082091

© 2022 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made.
You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions
You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Cogent Education (ISSN: 2331-186X) is published by Cogent OA, part of Taylor & Francis Group.
Publishing with Cogent OA ensures:
• Immediate, universal access to your article on publication
• High visibility and discoverability via the Cogent OA website as well as Taylor & Francis Online
• Download and citation statistics for your article
• Rapid online publication
• Input from, and dialog with, expert editors and editorial boards
• Retention of full copyright of your article
• Guaranteed legacy preservation of your article
• Discounts and waivers for authors in developing regions
Submit your manuscript to a Cogent OA journal at www.CogentOA.com

Page 22 of 22