1. Rationale of the study

1.1 Practical rationale

Teacher learning has drawn worldwide attention. Darling-Hammond and Lieberman (2012) pointed out that, many countries have made efforts to promote teacher learning (e.g., Alberta and Ontario in Canada, Finland, and Victoria in Australia). Yet, effective teacher learning requires many conditions including manpower, funds, structural resources, system guarantee et al. (e.g. Hargreaves & Fullan, 2015; Jensen et al., 2016). Among these conditions, master teachers are taken as crucial manpower to support peer learning (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). Teacher-led teacher learning then has been concerned. For example, Ontario launched the Teacher Learning and Leadership Program (TLLP) in 2007 (Campbell, 2017) to promote teacher learning using teacher leaders. Australia put forward a proposal in 2020 which intends to promote teacher learning by utilizing top teachers (Goss & Sonnemann, 2020). MTSs in China also implemented this strategy national wide which is little known by outsiders. 

1.2 Research rationale

MTSs, cross-school teacher learning communities in China, share features of PLCs which few concerned by researchers. Previous literature shows that most scholars used PLC to analyze school-based teacher learning communities in China. For example, Hairon & Tan (2017) explored the practices and challenges of PLCs in  Singapore and Shanghai. They find that although PLC is not a term specifically and widely used in China, scholars have tried to use it to analyze teacher collaborative learning practices in “teaching-research group” (jiaoyan zu, TRG) and  “lesson preparation group” (beike zu, LPG) within schools. Few of them adopting the concept, PLC, to explain cross-school teacher learning communities. How teacher leaders impact teacher collective learning in cross-school teacher learning communities is not clear yet. Thus, this study aims to reveal the veil of MTSs in China.

2. Research question

To understand teacher-led teacher learning in MTSs, four specific sub-questions are developed:

1) How do MTSs develop in China?

2) What do MTSs look like?

3) How do teachers in the studio learn together?

4) How do teacher leaders enact their leadership roles in the MTS?

3. Theoretical framework

The study involves two key concepts: teacher leadership and teacher learning. Theory about them is reviewed to help us answer the last two questions. The first questions are mainly solved by adopting a bottom-up way.

3.1 About teacher leadership

Teacher leadership has been popular in Western countries since the 1980s. Many studies have discussed teacher leadership behaviors (e.g. York-Barr & Duke, 2004; Katzemeger & Moller, 2009; Muijs & Harris, 2007; Wenner & Campbell, 2017). Among the studies, two types of teacher leadership behaviors are identified. 1) To enhance instruction, i.e. promoting teacher professional learning and improving student learning, teacher leaders may engage in collective professional learning, taking action research, sharing experiences and ideas with other peers, interact with peers, and frost collaborative culture and relations to support instruction. 2) To promote organizational improvement and change, teacher leaders manage regulatory affairs, building shared visions, increasing organization capacities, and collaborate with broader school communities.

3.1 About effective teacher learning

To maintain the high-quality practice, it has become imperative for teachers to engage in continuing professional learning (e.g., Grosemans et al., 2015; Hargreaves, 2003; Feiman-Nemser, 2012; Timperley, 2011). The literature synthesized some features of effective teacher learning. Three main features of effective teacher learning are elaborated in this study: 1) effective teacher learning is embodied in instructional practice; 2) effective teacher learning involves critical reflection; 3) effective teacher learning often takes the form of peer collaboration. The three aspects are related to each other instead of mutually independent. Teachers can improve themselves based on real practice by adopting approaches of individual reflection and cooperation with peer teachers.

1. Selecting research site and case The study adopted a qualitative approach, which was conducted in Zhejiang province, China. We selected Zhejiang as a research site because it is economically and educationally well-developed in China. Together with Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang has participated in PISA in 2018, and the scores of Reading, Mathematics, and Science are ahead of many other countries. Besides, some places (e.g., Hangzhou, and Wenzhou) of Zhejiang established the MTSs in 2006 (Li, 2018). Till now, Zhejiang has accumulated abundant experiences in developing MTSs. In Zhejiang, we further selected 8 MTSs focusing on the junior middle school stage. These studios are varied in subjects (Chinese, Mathematics, English, Science, and Society and Politics) and levels (district/county level, city level, and provincial level). 2. Selecting research participants Purposive and snowball sampling strategies were used in selecting participants: hosts and members in their MTSs. When selecting the hosts, to increase the representativeness, we intentionally maximized the various in gender (male and female), teaching subjects' work experience (range from 20-40), current positions, and other attributes in the sample. To gain a comprehensive picture, we also asked the hosts to recommend members in their MTSs as research participants. Overall, 8 hosts from 8 MTSs and 1-3 members in each studio were interviewed. 3. Data collection In each studio, three kinds of data collection methods were employed (semi-structured interviews, documents, and observation), which can provide a comprehensive database and increase the trustworthiness by testing the consistency among the data gathered from different sources. Each participant is interviewed individually. Two interview protocols (one for hosts and one for members) were developed and adopted. We also collected Several types of documents including government policies related to MTSs at different levels, website resumes related to 8 selected MTSs, publications (books and articles) of hosts, working diary of members, and development plan of MTSs et al.. As to observation, it could help us deepen our understanding of the context incidents (teacher leadership and teacher learning) that occur and provide additional dimensions and clarification of what interviewees say (Maxwell, 2013). We observed some typical teacher learning activities such as public lessons, lectures, and group seminars or workshops. 4. Data analysis To answer the questions of this study, the data were analyzed through a vertical way and then comparative horizontal way. Vertica analysis was performed first aiming to show the voices of each participant separately. The horizontal analysis helped us to seek common themes and patterns across different participants.

Findings For RQ1: How do MTSs develop in China? Major development phases of MTSs in China mainly consists of 3 stages. • Before 2001: Embryonic stage; • 2001-2010: Flourishing in East China; and • 2010-2020: National implementation stage. For RQ2: What do MTSs look like? 2.1 The process of building an MTS is usually comprised of these four steps: • Local education bureaus release the notice; • Master teachers apply to be or be nominated as hosts of MTSs; • Teachers from different schools apply to join one MTS; and • Local education bureaus officially approve and authorize the MTSs. Finally, an MTS is formed with one host (zhuchiren) and some core members (vary in the size 5-30, but less than 10 in general). The general structure can be shown as “1+n” (Hu, 2012). Some MTSs also recruit lots of “online members” (wangluo xueyuan) apart from core members (hexin chengyuan). For RQ3: How do teachers in the studio learn together? There are mainly five domains of teachers learning activities adopted in MTSs. • Giving, observing, and reviewing public lessons in a collective way; • Participating in practice-oriented research lead by hosts of MTSs; • Attending lectures shared by the host and other experts; • Reading journals, books, and magazines; and • Experience exchange (e.g. cooperation with other MTSs, study tour to well-developed schools, “Showtime” of MTSs, and online communication). For RQ4: How do teacher leaders enact their leadership roles in the MTS? Seven key leadership roles and behaviors of the hosts are concluded as below. • Vision crafter; • Teaching-research activity design; • Teacher development platform provider; • Co-learner; • Role model; and • Harmonious relationship builder.

CAMPBELL, C., LIEBERMAN, A. & YASHKINA, A. (2015) Teachers leading educational improvements: Developing teachers' leadership, improving practices, and collaborating to share knowledge, Leading and managing, 21(2), pp. 90-105. DARLING-HAMMOND, L., HYLER, M. E., GARDNER, M., & ESPINOZA, D. (2017). Effective Teacher Professional Development. CA: Learning Policy Institute. DAY, C., & SACHS, J. (2004). Professionalism, performativity and empowerment: Discourses in the politics, policies and purposes of continuing professional development. International Handbook on the Continuing Professional Development of Teachers (pp. 3-32). Maidenhead: Open University Press. FAIRMAN, J. C. & MACKENZIE, S. V. (2015) How teacher leaders influence others and understand their leadership, International Journal of Leadership in Education, 18(1), pp. 61-87. FULLAN, M., & HARGREAVES, A. (2016). Bringing the profession back in: Call to action. pp. 1-28. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED571784. GOSS, P. & SONNEMANN, J. (2020) Top teachers: sharing expertise to improve teaching. Retrieved on 1st October 2020, from: < https://grattan.edu.au/report/top-teachers/> HARGREAVES, A. (2003) Teaching in the knowledge society: Education in the age of insecurity (New York, US: Teachers College Press). HARRIS, A., JONES, M. & HUFFMAN, J. B. (2017) Teachers leading educational reform: The power of professional learning communities (London, UK: Routledge). HOFSTEDE, G. (2001) Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (London, UK: Sage). HORD, S. M. (1997). Professional learning communities: Communities of continuous inquiry and improvement. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED410659. KATZENMEYER, M. & MOLLER, G. (2009) Awakening the sleeping giant: Helping teachers develop as leaders (Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press). LEITHWOOD, K. & D. JANTZI (2000). The effects of different sources of leadership on student engagement in school (London, UK: Routledge). NGUYEN, D., HARRIS, A. & NG, D. (2019) A review of the empirical research on teacher leadership (2003–2017), Journal of Educational Administration, 58(1), pp. 60-80. CAMPBELL, C. (2017) Developing teachers’ professional learning: Canadian evidence and experiences in a world of educational improvement, Canadian Journal of Education/Revue Canadienne De L'Éducation, 40(2), pp. 1-33. STOLL, L., BROWN, C., SPENCE-THOMAS, K. & TAYLOR, C. (2015) Perspectives on teacher leadership for evidence-informed improvement in England, Leading and Managing, 21(2), pp. 76-91. WENNER, J. A. & CAMPBELL, T. (2017) The theoretical and empirical basis of teacher leadership: A review of the literature, Review of Educational Research, 87(1), pp. 134-171. YORK-BARR, J. & DUKE, K. (2004) What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship, Review of Educational Research, 74(3), pp. 255-316.