Session Information
11 ONLINE 53 A, Creating learning community
Paper Session
MeetingID: 992 8767 7736 Code: xe1SWF
Contribution
Introduction
This paper presents a literature mapping of studies that make evident what elements are key in the exercise of leadership to build a Professional Learning Community (PLC) in elementary schools. In order to achieve this purpose, the following research questions were formulated:
- How has scientific production on this subject evolved?
- What is the research methodology used in the studies analysed?
- What are the themes that emerge from the studies analysed and their main contributions?
It is important to note that this study is part of the project ‘Communities of professional practice and learning improvement: intermediate leadership, networks and interrelationships.Schools in challenging contexts’ (REF:PID2020-117020GB-100).
Theoretical framework
The term Professional Learning Community emerged in the late 1990s. Although initially linked to school restructuring efforts, over time it has come to the fore as a strategy for change to develop more collaborative school cultures that effectively impact on educational improvement (Escudero, 2016).
For some authors such as Bolivar (2017), one of the biggest challenges facing the education community in this century is ‘creating schools that ensure, for all students everywhere, the right to learn’ (p.10). The same author points out that ‘the role that political strategies for improvement (large-scale reform) can play will depend on building institutional capacity and organisational learning at the level of individual schools’ (p.8).
In this line of reflection and coinciding with the fourth wave of the school improvement movement, Hopkins et al., (2014) describes the ‘Capacity for Change’ phase as a concern that focuses on strengthening the internal processes of the school. Several authors in the field point out that an effective model for achieving this challenge is the PLC school (Bolívar, 2017; Harris & Jones, 2017). Similarly, this type of school enables capacity building for learning at the local level.
Thus, this school model can be seen to address two major questions: 1) how to generate the capacity for change in schools themselves? and 2) how to make them sustainable over time? For (Hargreaves & O'Connor, 2020), the sustainability and effectiveness of change and improvement in schools is one of the greatest difficulties. Therefore, their research points to the need to continue working towards the creation of conditions and strong commitments to school improvement.
In this sense, research shows that an essential condition for the sustainability of a PLC is distributed leadership, as it supports the implementation of collaborative learning approaches (Carroll et al., 2021). In turn, distributed leadership impacts on three aspects: collaboration, support and trust, thereby generating internal loyalty among members of a school. To this end, leaders become aware of and share their responsibilities, delegate power and exercise horizontal leadership (Flores-Fahara, et al., 2020).
Similarly, distributed leadership allows for delegating responsibilities, redistributing functions and building collaborative actions to achieve success in a PLC. Authors such as (DuFour & Reeves, 2016; Flores-Fahara et al., 2021) highlight that teachers and management can join forces and work together on the different areas that make up a school; organisation, curriculum planning, decision-making, team management, learning construction, pedagogical processes, establishing professional and personal relationships inside and outside the school, etc.
It is therefore significant to understand the connections that can be generated through leadership and school conditions aimed at school improvement and organisational functioning (Eilers & Camacho, 2007).
In this sense, the need arises to generate new educational policies driven by leadership and its contribution to make a PLC sustainable, the capacity to mobilise a school organisation through collaboration, sharing of responsibilities and the achievement of collective goals.
For these reasons, this literature review is undertaken in order to better understand how sustainability can be achieved in Professional Learning Communities (PLC).
Method
This work has been carried out on the basis of guidelines and criteria of rigour typical of systematic reviews (Arksey & O'Malley, 2005; Levac, Colquhoun & O'Brien, 2010) and the PRISMA protocol (Moher, Liberati, Tetzlaff, Altman & Prima Group, 2009; Gough, Thomas & Oliver, 2012). We adapted the methodological process in three phases: Phase one, a documentary search was carried out in selected databases such as WOS and SCOPUS, given their relevance in the field of scientific research. The search was conducted using the following terms: ‘leadership’ and ‘Professional Learning Communities’ or ‘Communities of Practice’ and ‘elementary schools’. Furthermore, we used the following search filters: a) year of publication (from 2000 to 2021); b) type of publication (article or review); and c) research area (Education Educational and Research, and Education Scientific Disciplines and Social Science). Once the search was complete, we eliminated the duplicate documents and defined a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria. For inclusion, the documents needed to: 1) relate to the object of study; 2) belong to the field of study; and 3) relate to the educational level of primary and secondary education. Whereas, documents were excluded if; 1) they did not relate to the object of study; 2) they were studies carried out at the university level; and 3) the complete text was not available. Initially, were found 37 articles. Although, after applying the initial filters, 35 papers were selected. Finally, after eliminating duplicates and assessing papers for eligibility by applying the inclusion criteria, a total of 19 papers were obtained. For phase two, we organized the documents in a table with the following variables: Title, year, author, source, country, methodological design, study-topic and findings. Then, we carried out two different analyses. First, we described the main characteristics of the documents, including year, country, level and methodological design. Second, we performed a content analysis, including study-topic and findings. We identified the study topics through the keywords of each document to group the works by common themes. Then, we identified the factors related to leadership development in a Professional learning community (PLC) in the results of the analyzed articles. Finally, phase 3, we summaries the evidence according to the descriptive characteristics and themes of the articles analyzed. We explain the elements of leadership that influence the sustainable development of a Professional learning community (PLC). Lastly, we offer the conclusions of this study.
Expected Outcomes
The results indicate an increase in this topic since 2012. The first publications appear in 2007. This coincides with the "fourth wave" in the development and advancement of the school improvement movement. The United States is the country with the highest scientific output in this area. In terms of methodology, qualitative studies predominate, using semi-structured and in-depth interviews, observations and document analysis. On the emerging themes, work on the exercise of distributed leadership and its impact on the development of PLC suggests that principal should engage in distributed leadership with teachers, which is also presented as a facilitator of a collaborative culture and joint curriculum planning. In this way, principals and teachers will build learning cultures focus on the needs of students and their capacities to improve and achieve school success. Another focus of interest is found in studies that address aspects of PLC as to collaborative culture and networking within and outside the school. These studies point out that collaborative work between teachers and school leaders in curriculum planning has a positive impact, as it enhances trust between colleagues and facilitates the sharing of experiences and learning from others. As well, others key aspects that characterize sustainable PLC is the building of collaborative networks within and outside the school through leadership to improve school outcomes and the training of teachers in collaborative capacity. Finally, the empirical studies analyzed show that recognizing a school, as a PLC is a demonstration of a way to improve the development and functioning of a school. This work demonstrates the essential role that school leadership plays in improving education, promoting pedagogical dynamics of joint work at the service of the educational success of all students, the professional development of teachers and implementation of distributed leadership at the service of the entire school community.
References
Arksey, H. & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International journal of social research methodology, 8 (1), 19-32. Bolívar, A. (2017). El Mejoramiento de la Escuela: Líneas Actuales de Investigación. Revista portuguesa de pedagogía, 51(2), 5-27. https://doi.org/10.14195/1647-8614_51-2_1 Carroll, K., Patrick, S. K. & Goldring, E. (2021). School Factors That Promote Teacher Collaboration: Results from the Tennessee Instructional Partnership Initiative. American Journal of Education, 127(4), 501-530. DuFour, R. & Reeves, D. (2016). The futility of PLC lite. Phi Delta Kappan, 97(6), 69-71. doi:10.1177/0031721716636878 Eilers, A. M. & Camacho, A. (2007). School culture change in the making: Leadership factors that matter. Urban education, 42(6), 616-637. Escudero, J.M. (2016). Inclusión y exclusión educativa: Realidades, miradas y propuestas. Nau Llibres Flores- Fahara, M., Bailey- Moreno, J. & Torres- Arcadia, C.C. (2020). Liderazgo docente en comunidades profesionales de aprendizaje: estudio de caso de dos escuelas públicas en México. Revista electronica educare, 25 (1), 1-22 Flores-Fahara, M., Bailey-Moreno, J. & Mortera-Cavazos, L.E. (2021). Comunidades profesionales de aprendizaje en escuelas públicas mexicanas: explorando su desarrollo. Educación XX1, 24(2), 283-304. https://doi.org/10.5944/educXX1.28556 Gough, D., Thomas, J. & Oliver, S. (2012). Clarifying differences between review designs and methods. Systematic reviews, 1(1), 1-9. Hargreaves, A. & O’Connor, M. T. (2020). Profesionalismo colaborativo. Cuando enseñar juntos supone el aprendizaje de todos. Ediciones Morata Harris, A. & Jones, M. (2017). Middle leaders’ matter: reflections, recognition, and renaissance. School Leadership y Management, 37(3), 213–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2017.1323398 Hopkins, D., Stringfield, S., Harris, A., Stoll, L. & Mackay, T. (2014). School and system improvement: a narrative state-of-the-art review. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(2), 257-281. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2014.885452 Levac, D., Colquhoun, H. & O'Brien, K. K. (2010). Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation science, 5(1), 1-9. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G. & Prisma Group. (2009). Reprint—preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Physical therapy, 89(9), 873-880.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.