This study examines how a Chilean mathematics lesson study community negotiates politically salient tensions that arise during post-lesson reflection, with particular attention to how unplanned classroom interactions are collectively interpreted, stabilized or deferred.
Using a qualitative case study design, the study analyzes post-lesson reflection discussions through discourse analysis and conocimiento mapping. Drawing on nepantla, conocimiento and political conocimiento, it traces how meanings are proposed, negotiated, stabilized and deferred across lesson study cycles.
Interpretive uncertainty emerged through interactional disruption rather than overt disagreement and was managed through discursive stabilization moves such as generalization, reframing and temporal distancing. These moves both expanded and constrained collective sense-making, stabilizing interpretation while deferring deeper engagement. Although potentially gendered interactions were not explicitly named or resolved, related concerns resurfaced in subsequent cycles, suggesting that political conocimiento developed longitudinally rather than through singular moments of critical recognition.
Based on one lesson study community, findings highlight how institutional norms and relational dynamics shape what becomes discussable in collaborative professional learning.
By theorizing deferral and discursive stabilization as central mechanisms in lesson study discourse, this study challenges models that equate impact with visible insight or belief change. It argues that evaluating lesson study should include attention to how unresolved tensions shape inquiry trajectories over time.
