Professional learning communities: A comparison study between day secondary school and fully residential secondary school in Malaysia

Tai, Mei Kin

QR Code Link :
Type :	article
Subject :	L Education (General)
Main Author :	Tai, Mei Kin
Additional Authors :	Omar Abdull Kareem
Title :	Professional learning communities: A comparison study between day secondary school and fully residential secondary school in Malaysia

Place of Production :	Tanjong Malim
Publisher :	Fakulti Pengurusan dan Ekonomi
Year of Publication :	2019
Corporate Name :	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

The purpose of the study was to examine and compare the patterns of professional learning communities (PLCs) in Malaysian day secondary school (DSS) and fully residential secondary school (FRSS). A total of 352 teachers from DSS and 357 from FRSS completed the survey with usable data. The result demonstrated that, i) both DSS and FRSS achieved the level of Quite Good in developing PLCs; ii) FRSS achieved higher level of practising PLCs than DSS and the difference was significant; iii) in terms of dimensions, both DSS and FRSS achieved higher mean score in Organizational Factor than in Non-organizational Factors and the difference was significant; iv) in terms of subdimensions, despite FRSS achieved the level of Good at Principal’s Commitment and Support, both DSS and FRSS achieved the level of Quite Good in all other sub-dimensions of PLCs; v) DSS achieved the highest mean score in Shared Norms and Vision whereas FRSS in Principal’s Commitment and Support; and vi) both DSS and FRSS achieved the lowest mean score in External Support System. The study contributes to the field of learning organization specifically in providing the first step in advancing more robust and comprehensive analysis in exploring PLCs in Malaysian secondary schools.

References

1. Barber, M., & Mourshed, M. (2007). How the World’s Best Performing Systems come out on top. Mckinsey & Company. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/socialsector/our-insights/how-the-worlds-best-performing-school-systems-come-out-on-top

2. Chen, C., Lee, C, Lin, H., & Zhang, C. (2016). Factors that develop effective professional learning communities in Taiwan. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(2), 248-265. doi: 10.1080/02188791.2016.1148853

3. DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & DuFour, R. (2005). On common ground: The power of professional learning communities. Bloomington: Solution Tree.

4. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Structural Equation Models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(August), 382-388.

5. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.

6. Hairon, S., & Dimmock, C. (2012). Singapore schools and professional learning communities: Teacher professional development and school leadership in an Asian hierarchical system. Educational Review, 64(4), 405–424.

7. Harris, A. (2010). Leading system transformation. School Leadership and Management, 30(30), 197–207.

8. Hipp, K. K., & Huffman, J. B. (2010). Demystifying the concept of professional learning communities. In K. K. Hipp & J. B. Huffman (Eds.), Demystifying professional learning communities: School leadership at its best (pp. 11–22). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

9. Holmes-Smith, P. (2001). Introduction to Structural Equation Modelling using LISREAL. Perth: ACSPRI-Winter Training Program.

10. Hord, S.M., & Sommers, W.A. (2008). Leading professional learning communities: Voices from research and practice. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.

11. Jensen, B. (2012). Catching up: Learning from the best school systems in East Asia. Sydney: Grattan Institute.

12. Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and practice of Structural Equation Modelling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.

13. Lee, M., & Kim, J. (2016). The emerging landscape of school-based professional learning communities in South Korean schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(2), 266-284.

14. Lomos, C., Hofman, R. H., & Bosker, R. J. (2011). Professional communities and student achievement A meta-analysis. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 22(2), 121–148.

15. Louis, K. S. (2008). Creating and sustaining professional communities. In A. M. Blankstein, P. D. Houston, & R. W. Cole (Eds.), Sustaining professional learning communities (pp. 41–57).Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

16. McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (2006). Professional communities and the work of high school teaching (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

17. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2013). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025. Putrajaya: Ministry of Education Malaysia.

18. Mitchell, C., & Sackney, L. (2000). Profound improvement: Building capacity for a learning community. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.

19. Olivier, D.F., & Hipp, J.B. (2016). Professional learning community process in the United States: Conceptualization of the process and district support for schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(2), 301-317.

20. Olivier, D. F., & Huffman, J. B. (2016). Professional learning community process in the United States: Conceptualization of the process and district support for schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(2), 301-317.

21. Pang, N. S., Wang, T., & Leung, L. (2016). Educational reforms and the practices of professional learning community in Hong Kong primary schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(2), 231-247.

22. Pyhalto, K., Soini, T., & Pietarinena, J. (2011). A systemic perspective on school reform: Principals’ and chief education officers’ perspectives on school development. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(1), 46–61.

23. Qiao, X., Yu, S., & Zhang, L. (2018). A review of research on professional learning communities in mainland China (2006-2015): Key findings emerging themes. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 46(5), 713-728. doi: 10.1177/1741143217707523

24. Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., & Thomas, S. (2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of educational change, 7(4), 221-258.

25. Stoll, L., & Louis, K. S. (2007). Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas (1st ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.

26. Tai, M.K., & Omar, A.K. (2014). Teacher attitudes toward change: A study in Malaysian high performing secondary school. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 21(3), 543-549.

27. Tai, M.K., & Omar, A.K. (2016). Teacher attitudes toward Change: A comparison between high- and mediocre- performing secondary schools in Malaysia. International Studies in Educational Administration, 41(1), 105-128.

28. Tai, M.K., Omar, A.K., & Ghouri, A.M. (2018). Developing a preliminary model onprofessional learning community in Malaysian secondary school (Unpublished research report which was funded by Fundamental Research Grant Scheme [Code: 2017-0196-107-01], Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia). Sultan Idris Education University, Perak Darul Ridzuan, Malaysia.

29. Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 80–91.

30. Wang, T. (2015). Contrived collegiality versus genuine collegiality: Demystifying professional learning communities in Chinese schools. Compare, 45(6), 908–930.

31. Zhang, J., & Pang, N.S.K. (2016). Investigating the development of professional learning communities: compare schools in Shanghai and Southwest China. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(2), 217–230.

This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials.
You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research.

Back to previous page