How do you connected learning communities advance creativity among educators?

Professional learning communities (PLCs) reflect ongoing, reflective, collaborative, critical, and learning-centered activities among teachers to enhance their professional expertise and practices for the continuous improvement of schools (Harris & Jones, 2010; Harris & Young, 2000; Stoll et al., 2006). In the past 40 years, PLC practices have been introduced to many countries to support teaching improvement (Hargreaves, 2019; Vanblaere & Devos, 2016; Zheng et al., 2021). In China, PLCs are institutionally embedded in Chinese teachers' daily work in the form of subject-based teaching research groups (TRG, jiaoyanzu), lesson preparation group (BKZ, beikezu), grade group (NJZ, nianjizu), and famous teachers' studio (FTS, mingshi gongzuoshi) (Qian & Allan, 2021; Qiao et al., 2018; Wang, 2015; Zheng et al., 2021). They are often regarded as the most important practices contributing to Chinese teachers' high professional competency and students’ outstanding performance in the Programme for International Student Assessment (OECD, 2010).

While there is ample evidence of the positive effects of PLCs on teaching practices (see Vescio et al., 2008, for a review), we posit that reflective dialogue, deprivatized practices, organizational learning, and shared responsibility which constitute of PLCs may lead to another desirable aspect of teacher practices: teacher innovation. Curriculum reform towards quality-oriented education in China emphasized the cultivation of innovative thinking of students in the knowledge society (Yin et al., 2014). Teacher innovation, which is defined as the generation and implementation of new ideas, is crucial for inherently rewarding teachers, cultivating creativity in students, and differentiating “stuck schools” from “moving schools” (Hülsheger et al., 2009; Lu, 2019). Teacher innovation requires information diversity and involves the coupling of complex thoughts in unique ways. Teachers who work in schools characterized by high levels of PLCs have more opportunities to collaborate, communicate, and conduct open dialogues with their colleagues (Lee & Ip, 2021). That is, PLCs promote exposure to diverse opinions, actual acquisition of supports from colleagues, and common understandings, which is positively related to innovation (Gong et al., 2020; Holdsworth & Maynes, 2017; Hülsheger et al., 2009; Lu & Campbell, 2020; Rubenstein et al., 2018).

Scholars have yet to theorize and examine the mechanism through which PLCs may promote teacher innovation (i.e., the “how” question) and the boundary conditions for the mechanism (i.e., the “when” question), leaving a gap in theory building and empirical testing. In this present study, we draw on social cognitive theory as the core theoretical foundation to conceptualize and test creative self-efficacy as the explanatory intervening mechanism in the relationship between PLCs and teacher innovation. Following the social cognitive theory, teachers will put effort to innovation and persist in such activities when they believe that they can produce innovative outcomes (Bandura, 1997). PLCs may boost teacher creative self-efficacy because of the increased professional support, dialogue, cooperation, and mutual commitment to student success in PLC activities. That is, teacher creative self-efficacy plays a central role in the exercise of personal agency or intentional control to influence their efforts toward innovation, and PLCs, as an environmental structure, may influence teachers’ cognitive processes and their behaviors (Bandura, 1997; Gong et al., 2020).

Recent studies have revealed that PLCs are highly contextually embedded and are not always beneficial to teacher practices (Chen et al., 2020; Lomos et al., 2011; Zheng et al., 2021). Contrived collegiality is the most important factor resulting in the neutralized or diminished effects of PLCs (Chen et al., 2020). Specifically, in authoritarian-oriented schools where PLCs are formally required, predetermined, driven by administrative power, and fixed in time and space, teachers often report disliking PLCs, withhold their trust, and restrict their individual autonomy (Hargreaves, 2019; Wang, 2015), which further weakens their innovation. Given the inconsistent results regarding the effects of PLCs (Chen et al., 2020; Giles & Hargreaves, 2006; Hargreaves, 2019; Holdsworth & Maynes, 2017; Lomos et al., 2011), researchers have called for a deeper understanding of their effectiveness (Hargreaves, 2019; Lomos et al., 2011; Wang, 2015; Zheng et al., 2021). Thus, in the present study, we explore the contextual boundary conditions which may enhance, neutralize, or diminish the effects of PLCs. This knowledge is especially important, because it helps to explain the variation in their effects, verifying whether their effectiveness is contingent on contextual variables.

Innovative climate refers to the shared values, beliefs, and assumptions of organizational members concerning the ideas and practices of innovation (Chou et al., 2019; Van der Vegt et al., 2005). In the school where innovation is supported, encouraged, and innovation failures are tolerated, teachers maybe more likely to take risks to implement innovation (Hülsheger et al., 2009). To rationalize the moderating effect of an innovative climate, we followed the social information processing perspective (Fulk et al., 1990; Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978) which suggests that teachers are actively using informational cues from the actual attitudes of supervisors to behave in congruence with school norms and expectations. Teachers who work in an innovative climate are used to being empowered and thinking on their own. Perceiving the social cues of creativity as a priority in the school, teachers may engage more actively and positively in a series of activities of collaboration, reflection, and sharing related to PLCs, which is helpful for promoting the generation and application of creative ideas. Thus, we expect that an innovative climate may minimize the adverse effects of contrived collegiality. Teachers who work in a highly innovative climate respond more actively and positively to genuine collegiality in PLCs compared with those who work in schools with a low level innovative climate. That is, PLCs may have a stronger effect on teacher creative self-efficacy and innovation when they are offered in a school climate that is perceived as supportive to innovation and risk-taking.

Previous studies often examined PLCs at the individual teacher level. However, as a school-level variable, the degrees of PLCs in different schools may exert different effects on individual teachers (Zheng et al., 2021). Meanwhile, the school contexts where the PLCs are embedded also influence their effectiveness. Thus, it is important to conduct multi-level studies of PLCs (Lomos et al., 2011; Zheng et al., 2021).

In short, the proposed relationships are captured in the four research questions that guided this study: (1) Are PLCs positively related to teacher innovation? (2) Does teachers' creative self-efficacy mediate the effects of PLCs on teacher innovation? (3) Does the innovative climate of the school moderate the effects of PLCs on teachers’ creative self-efficacy? (4) Does the innovative climate of the school moderate the mediated effects of PLCs on teacher innovation through teacher self-efficacy? Fig. 1 depicts the overall research model of the present study.

In the present study, we draw on both social cognitive theory and social information processing perspective to illustrate the mechanisms through which PLCs promote teacher innovation in schools with different levels of innovative climate. Specifically, we adopt social cognitive theory as the core theoretical foundation to clarify how teacher creative self-efficacy plays a central role in the exercise of personal agency or intentional control to influence their effort toward innovation, and how PLCs as the environmental structure influence teachers' efficacy beliefs and their behaviors (i.e., addressing the “how” question). Meanwhile, to better understand the moderating effect of innovative climate (i.e., addressing the “when” question), we integrate social information processing perspective as a supplement to illustrate how individuals socially construct and adapt their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors to their social contexts (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). That is, schools with higher levels of innovative climate provide important social information of work standards, role expectations, and extrinsic or intrinsic motivation concerning teachers' behaviors toward innovation, which promotes teachers’ social construction of their perceptions and attitudes to be innovative teachers. Hence, the direct and indirect effects of PLCs on teacher innovation will be fortified when the innovative climate in the school is reinforced.

The present study aims at contributing to the existing literature in the following ways. First, previous studies have paid much attention to the role of PLCs in teacher development or school improvement in general (Vescio et al., 2008; Voelkel & Chrispeels, 2017; Zhang & Yuan, 2020). Our work contributes to the small but growing literature on the positive effect of PLCs on teacher innovation (Sargent, 2015; Tam, 2015). Second, adopting social cognitive theory, this study takes a step forward to identify the underlying mechanisms through which PLCs influence teacher innovation via efficacy beliefs. Third, following social information processing perspective, we investigate the moderating effect of the innovative climate. The boundary conditions of PLCs provide important cues about how to facilitate the development of contrived collegiality to genuine collegiality in PLCs. Finally, considering the nested nature of school data, this study adopted a multilevel design which enabled us to provide more robust and meaningful outcomes (Sleegers et al., 2013; Zheng et al., 2021). The rationale for establishing this moderated-mediation model is elaborated in the following sections.

Literature review

This study focuses on the moderated-mediated relationships among four constructs: PLCs, teacher creative self-efficacy, teacher innovation, and innovative climate. In this section, we define and review the related research on each of these constructs.

Participants

Data for this study were based on a project aiming at promoting teacher development in senior high schools in Qingdao, a city in northern China. The data collection was supported by the Qingdao Municipal Education Bureau, but all procedures such as questionnaire survey and data analysis strictly followed the principle of confidentiality. Background information of the project, such as project aims, guarantees of anonymity, and instructions to fill out the questionnaire were introduced before

Test of the measurement model

CFA was performed to assess the validity and distinctiveness of the study measures. The goodness-of-fit indices showed an acceptable data structure: χ2 = 5046.34 (df = 692, p < 0.01), RMSEA = 0.04, SRMR = 0.04, TLI = 0.93, CFI = 0.93. All items were significantly related to their respective constructs.

We tested alternative models to examine the discriminant validity of the constructs. Owing to the possible convergence of teacher innovation and creative self-efficacy (r = 0.86, p < 0.01, n

Discussion

PLCs have increasingly attracted the attention of education policymakers, leaders, and researchers around the world. Previous studies have recommended the importance of PLCs to promote teacher learning and school improvement (DuFour & Eaker, 1998; Harris & Jones, 2010; Lee & Ip, 2021; Lomos et al., 2011; Louis et al., 1996; Vescio et al., 2008; Zheng et al., 2019). However, we still know little about the mechanisms and boundary conditions through which PLCs influence school and teacher outcomes

Funding

This work was supported by National Social Science Foundation for Education of China under grant CFA 210248.

Recommended articles (6)