Professional Learning Communities defined by five dimensions with a four-stage development scale¶

Theory · All theories
Evidence · 4 claims (4 for) · 1 study (1 design), q2 · 0 of 1 report an effect size · 4 claims rest on one study

Description¶

The article adopts the PLC construct as "a group of teachers who share a common understanding of education, reflect on their work, and exchange their practices to improve student learning", organized into five dimensions: "shared leadership (D1), shared vision and values (D2), collective learning (D3), shared personal practice (D4), and supportive conditions (D5)". Development is assessed on a four-stage scale adapted from Bolívar (2017): not initiated, initiated, implemented, and institutionalized. The study operationalizes the dimensions with five validated Likert questionnaire items (Cronbach's Alpha 0.86) to gauge teams' degree of evolution as PLCs.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Questionnaire items adapted from Bolívar (2017) validated by 12 experts with Aiken's V > 0.70 for all questions

Constraints¶

• The institutionalized stage is defined for school culture; the article applies the scale to university teams

Target Learners¶

• University academic community members (faculty, students, alumni, administrative staff)

Target Learning Objectives¶

• Collaborative professional development and improvement of teaching practice through PLCs

Claims¶

• I3P Calls Plc Implementation Stage No Significant Differences [+M]
• Teams consolidated as PLCs regardless of the type of prior connections that formed them, with no significant differences across connection types [+W]
• Content analysis of project reports identified five factors contributing to PLC formation (common interests, communication systems, mutual learning, collaborative work, UNAL values) and three hindering factors (administrative management, project scheduling, personal non-compliance) [+W]
• PLC development by promoting role: administrative-staff-led PLCs rated shared leadership lower but shared values higher than teacher- and student-led PLCs, with no statistically significant differences [+W]

Related Theories¶

• I3P stage-based model: open innovation as a strategy to foster Professional Learning Communities in higher education
• Community of practice with Wenger's five membership trajectories
• Taxonomy of supportive versus developmental practices in teacher professional communities
• Six R&D practice dimensions (strategy, structure, intensity, spread, engagement, evidence) with a four-stage Nascent-to-Sustaining rubric

Examples¶

• Transfer strategy for building PLCs through innovation projects: common interests, communication systems, and peer learning of practices
• PLC facets that catalyze scholarship epistemology: trust, common goal, reflection opportunity, dialogue, and accountability for results

Key Sources¶

• Layton-Jaramillo, S.E., Duarte-Velasco, O.G., Aguaded-Ramírez, E.M., & Carrillo-Rosúa, F.J. (2025). Innovation in university science teaching through professional learning communities. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 15(1), 142-161. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.3115