ISSN: 2226-6348
Open access
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 sub-dimensions, 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.
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/social-
sector/our-insights/how-the-worlds-best-performing-school-systems-come-out-on-top
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
DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & DuFour, R. (2005). On common ground: The power of professional learning
communities. Bloomington: Solution Tree.
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.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
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.
Harris, A. (2010). Leading system transformation. School Leadership and Management, 30(30), 197–207.
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.
Holmes-Smith, P. (2001). Introduction to Structural Equation Modelling using LISREAL. Perth:
ACSPRI-Winter Training Program.
Hord, S.M., & Sommers, W.A. (2008). Leading professional learning communities: Voices from research and practice. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
Jensen, B. (2012). Catching up: Learning from the best school systems in East Asia. Sydney: Grattan
Institute.
Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and practice of Structural Equation Modelling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.
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.
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.
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.
McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (2006). Professional communities and the work of high school
teaching (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2013). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025. Putrajaya: Ministry of Education Malaysia.
Mitchell, C., & Sackney, L. (2000). Profound improvement: Building capacity for a learning community. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
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.
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.
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.
Pyhalto, K., Soini, T., & Pietarinena, J. (2011). A systemic perspective on school reform: Principals’ and chief education officers’ perspectives on school developm
In-Text Citation: (Kin & Kareem, 2019)
To Cite this Article: Kin, T. M., & Kareem, O. A. (2019). Professional Learning Communities: A Comparison Study between Day Secondary School and Fully Residential Secondary School in Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 8(2), 87–101.
Copyright: © 2019 The Author(s)
Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode