The Effectiveness of Professional Learning Communities to Improve Academic Achievement

Full text

Running head: JohnsonOEDR8203-8 1
The Effectiveness of Professional Learning Communities to
Improve Academic Achievement
Ola Johnson
Northcentral University
August 25, 2017

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 2
Introduction
Leaders of rural and urban school districts have organized Professional Learning
Communities (PLCs) so that educators can collaborate for the purposes of acquiring knowledge
about pedagogy, student achievement, and cultivating a positive school climate. The purpose of
this literature review is to investigate the effectiveness of PLCs on student achievement and
school climate, and how through the implementation of PLCs, these two components are
addressed through educators and administrators shared strategies and visions.
Keywords: EBSCOhost, ERIC, and ProQuest, Google - Professional learning
communities, student academic achievement, effective schools characteristics, classroom
management.

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 3
The Effectiveness of Professional Learning Communities to
Improve Academic Achievement
Research suggests that PLCs are a focus on learning that can increase student learning
and reduce achievement gaps through knowledge, skills, and dispositions (Prytula & Weiman,
2012). PLCs are a collective examination into best practices in teaching and learning and ways to
build on shared knowledge (Barton & Stepanek, 2012). PLC members are action orientated by
engaging in experiments with learning, committed to continuous improvement to create
conditions for a long-lasting learning environment which invites innovation, and being results
orientated (DuFour & Mattos, 2013; East, 2015; De Neve, & Devos, (2017).
Moreover, researchers agree that PLCs are growing and has substantial potential for
supporting the implementation of improvement and the development of educational restructuring
in the areas of academic achievement and school climate (Lippy & Zamora, 2012; Prytula &
Weiman, 2012). Education reform and increased examination on schools have led to the
implementation of PLCs as a valuable strategy to increase teaching and learning in schools.
PLCs initiates an opportunity to look into school districts practices focusing on academic results
and teacher, student, and administration relationships (East, 2015). The implementation of PLCs
within the school environment is one of the eight effective schools characteristics.
According to researchers, there are seven other characteristics that are key components in
PLCs; shared vision and goals, purposeful teaching, high expectations, accountability,
stimulating and secure learning environment, professional leadership, focus on learning and
teaching (Leclerc, Moreau, Dumouchel, & Sallafranque-St. Louis, 2012; Thessin, 2015). Its main
focus is on the cultivation of learning, which would include both teachers and administrators to
work collaboratively identifying with the same vision, values and supporting one another
(Woodland, 2016). PLCs provide strategies that allow educators to develop relationships that

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 4
could encourage ongoing development and improvement for themselves and their students
(Barton & Stepanek, 2012). PLCs are founded on the principle that knowledge results from the
different viewpoints and experiences that educators share with one another as they work toward
common goals (ndunda, Van Sickle, Perry, & Capelloni, 2017). This in essence could resolve
instructional issues, improve student’s academic achievement, and create a positive school
climate.
Literature Review
Professional Learning Communities embrace the possibility to meet the difficult needs of
school transformation (Lippy & Zamora, 2012). Literature regarding the growth of PLCs suggest
that PLCs do provide a positive impact on students’ learning achievements (ndunda, Van Sickle,
Perry, & Capelloni, 2017). PLCs are based on the principle that knowledge is the effect from the
various viewpoints and experiences that teachers share with one another as they work toward
collective goals (Barton & Stepanek, 2012). Gray, Kruse and Tarter, (2016) point out that its
knowledge base will depend on what it is teachers want their students to learn, how teachers will
know when each student has learned it, and how can teachers improve on current levels of
student achievement. Although PLCs are designed to be the catalysts for overall school reform,
consistency, collaboration and support from administrators and policy-makers, PLCs could fail
in producing intended results due to poor implementation and/or efforts to sustain collegiality
and focus (Gary et al., 2016; Lippy & Zamora, 2012; Mintzes, Marcum, Messerschmidt-Yates,
& Mark, 2016).
Prytula and Weiman, (2012) identified that the tenacity of the professional learning
community is bringing attention to teachers who share practices, pedagogy, and concepts that has
been working to improve student achievement and then build on them. A schools main objective

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 5
is to improve the academic achievements of students (Leclerc et al., 2012). Researchers have
found that when a school that is passionate and sincere about education, they will embrace the
task of providing quality intensities of learning for all students, which help improve student
achievement (Teague, & Anfara, 2012).
Effective PLCs are the conception of a positive school climate and an environment of
learning. Research points out that today’s educational climate poses instructional challenges for
teachers, and that much emphasizes has been placed on the implementation of (PLCs) within the
school environment. However, even with the understanding in theory that PLCs exist for the
betterment of student learning, there are still identified gaps in the research knowledge base that
include lack of vision, values and support, and emotions in learning (Cherkowski, 2016). The
emphasis is on the cultivation of learning that involves both teachers and administrators to work
collaboratively. This would aid in resolving instructional issues, improve student’s academic
achievement and create a positive school climate. The purpose of this literature review is to
investigate the effectiveness of PLCs on student achievement and school climate.
Theoretical Framework
The main objective of professional learning communities is to establish a foundation
within the school structure. Constructivism, social constructivism are two theoretical frameworks
supporting PLCs. Researchers have incorporated these theoretical frameworks in most
educational environments as a formula to encourage educators by providing them an outlet to
reduce isolation by providing opportunities to work with colleagues and focus on student
progress and performance (Barton & Stepanek, 2012). Constructivism is a theory considered as a
foundation for education, wherein people work together to solve problems through collaboration
(Leclerc et al., 2012).

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 6
Social Constructivism emboldens teachers to examine information and create new
meaning. This will enable teachers to solve instructional issues in the classroom and the school
as a whole and places emphasizes on the need for partnership among students and interactions
with teachers. Thus, this concept encourages communities of practice to achieve learning goals
and recognize that teachers are unique and bring previously acquired knowledge and experiences
to the table (East, 2015). The trainings that are acquired to understand the effectiveness of PLCs
as a restructuring initiative is to gather a mutual understanding and shared visions for an
essential, positive change in teacher practice leading to increased student achievement (Lippy &
Zamora, 2012).
However, training is not all that is needed for educators in PLCs to really affect the
connection between the student, the teacher, and pedagogy in the classroom. More specifically,
the necessary supports that educational leaders must offer for PLC teams to successfully work to
increase instruction are often disregarded in the course of reform (Thessin, 2015).
PLCs and Student Achievement
Research reveals that PLCs have contributed to great strides in student achievement since
there induction (Williams, 2013). The interaction of people in a group began with Follett (1924),
who played a significant role in discovering its outcome in the workplace. Since then, there has
been a considerable amount of change that now expands into school districts (Williams, 2013).
In support of PLCs, East (2015) noted, “Creating a collaborative culture and establishing PLCs
go hand in hand when seeking to improve schools.” To improve student achievement in the
school, a principal must “focus on the collective analysis of evidence of student learning”
(DuFour & Mattos, 2013).

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 7
DuFour and Mattos (2013) studied the implementation of focusing efforts on the
responsiveness of students rather than the mundane task of conducting teacher observations. The
conclusion from their study revealed that the implementation of PLCs within the school structure
would bring together principals and teachers to decide what best benefits the students.
Conversing as a team, they would be able to develop questions regarding what they wanted their
students to gain after teaching a lesson, how they would show evidence of students learning, and
how can teachers improve on current levels of student achievement. According to DuFour and
Mattos, this strategy would help guide teachers in there develop of problem-solving techniques.
Many schools benefit from the attributes of PLCs. Linder, Post, and Calabresee, (2012)
studied transforming learning and how PLCs can invoke positive relationships with teachers and
students. These studies support Follett’s (1924) concept of interaction of people in a group in the
workplace to establish PLCs. Research has revealed over time that PLCs have flourished, given
the time to develop, and have shown positive results in students’ academic achievements (Linder
et al., 2012). DuFour and Mattos, (2013) advocated that when implementing mandated reforms
to improve student learning, the implementation has proven to be ineffective in raising student
achievement. DuFour and Mattos further report that when principals impose grueling supervision
and classroom observations, this process neither benefit the teacher or the student. For instance, a
person who used IBM computers with floppy disk when the first personal computer came about
in the early 80’s, more than likely required ongoing training/professional development to meet
the needs of the current computers in the 21st Century. Likewise, if the same process is used to
evaluate students learning by doing the same teacher classroom observations, students’ academic
achievements will not improve. According to DuFour and Mattos, PLCs will only be successful
when teachers and principals function together as PLCs.

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 8
Schools leaders are required to improve the quality of teacher practice and increase
student outcomes. Dogan, Pringle, & Mesa, (2016), suggest that when teachers work together to
resolve issues of practice, they cultivate various ways that are directly connected to their
students’ learning. Literature regarding the growth of PLCs suggests that when functioning
effectively, the structure can have positive effects on student achievement and academic progress
(Gray et al., 2016). According to Lippy and Zamora, the essential purpose of instruction can be
observed through the lens of making instruction meet students at their level of need in order to
improve the required mastery of core content. Providing feedback on the merits of student
learning is a crucial component for educators as participants in PLCs (Dogan et al., 2016).
DuFour and Mattos advocated that the “effectiveness of any given strategy can only be
determined by evidence of its effect on student learning” (DuFour & Mattos, 2013).
The key element affecting student learning derives from building a relationship between
teachers and other school professionals within a PLC. By promoting productive collaborations
when resolving classroom difficulties, this community-based environment lessens the isolation
of teachers. By working as a team, the teachers will increase their obligation to the school’s goals
and mission. PLCs thereby improve their understanding of educating and learning ideas and
makes sure that the mixture of academic disciplines are closely intertwined. Teachers will need
to decide on specific and measurable goals for student learning and identifying ways to scaffold
student learning (Woodland, 2013). Thus, the concern for student success becomes collective.
Teachers functioning in this type of environment are knowledgeable at the pedagogical level, are
committed to ongoing professional development, and consider student learning as their main
objective (Leclerc et al., 2012). When teachers work together as a means of improving student

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 9
learning, they have found that it is a great tool for their own professional development (Leclerc
et al., 2012).
When school leaders establish stability between the relationships of educators and
stakeholders, they are able to focus their efforts and establish a culture of learning, whereby
effective PLCs are produced allowing the school to reap the benefits and increase student
achievement (East, 2015). Barton and Stapanek advocate that when the five essential
characteristics of PLCs are preformed daily (shared views and values, resources, a clear focus,
reflective conversations, and collaboration), student achievement ranks very high (Barton &
Stapanek, 2012). When teachers support and learn from one another’s shared practice, frequently
visit one another’s classrooms viewing and observing their peers, they share ideas and encourage
each other and increase their content and pedagogical knowledge, which, in turn, improves
students’ academic achievement.
Qualitative Research Method
Schools are being required to improve the quality of teacher practice and significantly
increase student outcomes. A qualitative method was used to conduct a case study of one
principal who had an extended record of success in leading school change efforts and developing
a model inclusive program in his school. The research question raised is: How does a principal
provide support for school improvement during an era of high-stakes accountability?
The principal who participated in this investigation, Tom Smith (a pseudonym), was
chosen using Purposeful sampling (Patton, 2002). Tom served as an elementary teacher, middle
school teacher, and high school teacher at an alternative school for 11 years. In addition he held
various district staff roles for 9 years, including coordinator of gifted services for 2 years. Prior
to beginning his tenure as a principal he served as a principal intern for 1 year. In 1992, Tom
assumed the role of principal at Hawk’s Nest Elementary and has remained there for the past 18

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 10
years. The methodology and design used was a case study methodology (Merriam, 1998; Yin,
2008). This case study took place during one school year and combined ethnographic methods
(interviews and observations) with a phenomenological lens to study the lived experience of
being a principal. This emic or insider’s point of view (Merriam, 1998; Patton, 2002) provided
insight into the meaning and interpretations a principal attached to the events that occurred as his
school engaged in school improvement.
The variables used in this investigation was the case study methodology (Merriam,
1998; Yin, 2008) to examine the role of the principal in supporting school improvement during
an era of high-stakes accountability. The researchers use Phenomenological interviews
(Seidman, 2006), participant observations (Patton, 2002), and dialogical or informal
conversational interviews with the principal (Carspecken, 1997; Patton, 2002) were conducted
throughout the school year as their instruments. Three phenomenological interviews were
conducted during the first month of the study. Each of these focused, in-depth interviews lasted
approximately 2 hours and explored the principal’s past and present experiences related to the
phenomena under study (Rubin & Rubin, 1995; Seidman, 2006). Open-ended questions were
used to explore the participant’s experiences as he identified key events and reflected on the
meaning of these events as the interviews progressed. Each phenomenological interview built on
the previous interview and also addressed critical events or themes that had been identified
during informal interviews and observations.
The researcher constructed an overall description and framework for the meanings
discovered in the study (Patton, 2002), blending the researcher’s and principal’s perspectives on
the identified phenomena. The researcher and principal reviewed and reached consensus
regarding this information for the ethical treatment of the human subjects. To ensure the

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 11
trustworthiness of the investigation, the researcher worked closely with the principal to construct
themes and wrote descriptions of the themes, resulting in ongoing member checking of the
results of the study. Second, the investigator spent an extended period of time in the setting
studying specific phenomena that were identified, resulting in prolonged engagement and
persistent observation. Third, triangulation of data was used to cross-check findings from the
interviews by observing the principal’s behavior in a natural setting. Finally, the investigator
used peer debriefing to discuss the methods and themes as they emerged.
The limitations in this study was that this case study was limited to one principal, and this
severely limits the transferability (Patton, 2002) of the results to the leadership practices of other
principals. A second, related limitation concerns the fact that the data that were collected and
reported in this study do not include perspectives of teachers, parents, and other stakeholders
regarding the work of the principal. Third, the findings of this study are contextually bound and
particular to one school at a particular point in time. Further research is needed to present a more
complete understanding of how effective principals conceptualize and enact their roles as school
leaders in an era of high-stakes accountability. Future research should also provide more detailed
information regarding how effective principals cross borders and navigate the politics of leading
a school in the current era of high-stakes accountability. Finally, more research is needed to
understand how principals conceptualize and enact effective school-based professional
development that results in changes in teacher practice and improved outcomes for students.
The results of the study indicate that the central metaphor that guides Tom Smith’s
leadership is “lubricating the human machinery” to improve the lives of teachers and students so
that they can do their best work. This investigation provides insight into how one principal
enacted his role to provide support for school improvement during an era of high-stakes

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 12
accountability. Therefore, Tom’s leadership focus on creating and cultivating relationships that
are fueled by making personal connections with people, both internal and external to the school,
but also he embraces a deeper moral conviction related to improving his school by helping his
teachers and students reach their full potential.
Conclusion
The concept of the professional learning communities originated from the business world,
but based on literature review information, PLCs play a significant role and has substantial
potential for supporting the implementation of improvement and the development of educational
restructuring in the areas of academic achievement and school climate (Williams, 2013).
Professional learning communities help to construct an environment of sharing ideas,
encouraging creativity and invoking collaboration that improves teaching and learning for
leaders, teachers, and students (Lippy & Zamora, 2012). Moreover, PLCs affect social and
emotional change through questioning the main purpose of education and how students learn
(Dary & Pickeral, 2013). This literature review has provided a review of empirical studies that
described the impact of PLCs on school leaders, teachers, and students. The claim is that, when
academic achievement and school climate are the main focus during collaboration, PLCs may
potentially have the ability to alter teachers’ old ways of thinking and capacity to improve
student learning (Dogan et al., 2016). Therefore, collaboration has to make a positive impact on
student achievement and school climate (Barton & Stapanek, 2012; ndunda, et al., 2017).
Even though PLCs are intended to be the facilitators for overall school reform, reliability,
collaboration and support from administrators and policy-makers could fail in producing
intended results because of poor implementation and efforts to maintain collegiality and focus
(Gary et al., 2016; Lippy & Zamora, 2012; Mintzes, Marcum, Messerschmidt-Yates, & Mark,

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 13
2016). Much emphasizes has been placed on the implementation of PLCs within the school
environment; however, even with the understanding in theory that PLCs exist for the betterment
of student learning, there are still identified gaps in the research knowledge base that include
lack of vision, values and support, and emotions in learning (Cherkowski, 2016). This could
cause instructional challenges for teachers, thereby decreasing the educational climate.
In order for PLCs to flourish, trainings are acquired to understand the effectiveness of
restructuring and gathering a mutual understanding about the shared visions for an essential, and
positive change in teachers’ practice leading to increased student achievement (Lippy & Zamora,
2012). This is essential, though not the main tool needed for educators in PLCs to really affect
the connection between the student, the teacher, and pedagogy in the classroom. More
specifically, the necessary supports such as job-embedded learning for educators, results-
orientated goals to mark progress, and a system to develop questions regarding what they want
their students to gain after teaching a lesson, how they would show evidence of students
learning, and how teachers can improve on current levels of student achievement. These are tools
that educational leaders must offer for PLC teams to successfully work to increase instruction,
but are often disregarded in the course of reform (Thessin, 2015). PLCs are not programs that
change year after year, but they provide a profound impact on the structure and culture of the
school and the expectations and practices of the professionals within it (De Neve, & Devos,
(2017).

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 14
References
Barton, R., & Stepanek, J. (2012). The impact of professional learning communities. Principal’s
Research Review, 7(4), 1–4.
Cardichon, J., & Roc, R. (2015). Climate change series: federal, state, and local policy
recommendations for creating a positive school climate. Alliance for Excellence
Education, 1, p. 1.
De Neve, D., & Devos, G. (2017). How do professional learning communities aid and hamper
professional learning of beginning teachers related to differentiated instruction? Teachers
& Teaching, 23(3), 262-283. doi:10.1080/13540602.2016.1206524
Dogan, S., Pringle, R., & Mesa, J. (2016). The impacts of professional learning communities on
science teachers’ knowledge, practice and student learning: a review. Professional
Development in Education, 42(4), 569-588. doi:10.1080/19415257.2015.1065899
East, K. A. (2015). A study of professional learning communities: Characteristics of
implementation and perceived effectiveness in improvement schools in West Virginia.
Dissertation Abstracts International Section A, 76.
Gray, J., Kruse, S., & Tarter, C. J. (2016). Enabling school structures, collegial trust and
academic emphasis: Antecedents of professional learning communities. Educational
Management Administration & Leadership, 44(6), 875-891.
Leclerc, M., Moreau, A. C., Dumouchel, C., & Sallafranque-St. Louis, F. (2012). Factors that
promote progression in schools functioning as professional learning community.
International Journal of Education Policy & Leadership, 7(7), 1–14.
Linder, R. A., Post, G., & Calabrese, K. (2012). Professional learning communities: Practices for
successful implementation. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 78(3), 13–22.
Lippy, D., & Zamora, E. (2012). Implementing effective professional learning communities with
consistency at the middle school level. National Forum of Educational Administration &
Supervision Journal, 29(3), 51-72.
Mintzes, J. J., Marcum, B., Messerschmidt-Yates, C., & Mark, A. (2013). Enhancing self-
efficacy in elementary science teaching with professional learning communities. Journal
of Science Teacher Education, 24(7), 1201-1218.
ndunda, m., Van Sickle, M., Perry, L., & Capelloni, A. (2017). University−urban high school
partnership: Math and science professional learning communities. School Science &
Mathematics, 117(3/4), 137-145. doi:10.1111/ssm.12215

JohnsonOEDR8203-8 15
Prytula, M., & Weiman, K. (2012). Collaborative professional development: An examination of
changes in teacher identity through the professional learning community model. Journal
of Case Studies in Education, 3, 1–19.
Teague, G. M., & Anfara Jr., V. A. (2012). Professional learning communities create sustainable
change through collaboration. Middle School Journal, 44(2), 58–64.
Thessin, R. A. (2015). Learning from one urban school district: Planning to provide essential
supports for teachers' work in professional learning communities. Educational
Planning, 22(1), 15-27.
Williams, D. J. (2013). Urban education and professional learning communities. Delta Kappa
Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators, 79(2), 31–39.
Woodland, R. H. (2016). Evaluating PK–12 professional learning communities. American
Journal of Evaluation, 37(4), 505-521. doi:10.1177/1098214016634203