The Relationship of Headmasters' Distributive Leadership towards Professional Learning Community Practices

Vol. 12(2) 2023,


Introduction
Creating professional learning communities (PLCs) seems to have a lot of potential for developing the ability for long-term change. As a result, it has emerged as a "hot topic" in several nations. Over the past 25 years, we have learned a great deal about how to improve individual schools. However, educators worldwide still face significant obstacles to maintain improvement over time and spread improvements throughout entire systems. The effects of globalization and fast change seem to call for new approaches to learning. Learning cannot be left up to individuals anymore. It is recommended that whole school communities cooperate and study together to take responsibility for change, figuring out the best ways to increase young people's learning, to succeed in a changing and increasingly complicated world.
According to Opfer and Pedder (2011), teacher professional learning activities are frequently deemed unsuccessful in teacher professional development research. One of the reasons is that most of the research on teacher professional development neglects to acknowledge the context and situated nature of teacher learning. Most of the literature on teacher professional development focuses on isolated specific activities, processes, or programs, resulting in lists of findings and recommendations that others cannot replicate, are at odds with findings from other studies, or are formulated at a very general level (Cordingley, 2015). In their literature evaluation, Opfer and Pedder (2011) suggest that research on professional teacher learning be reconceived to better understand the circumstances, reasons, and methods of teacher learning. These authors contend that the present body of literature on teacher learning places too much emphasis on teachers and their activities or programs, leaving out the context of institutions or educational systems. Most of the literature on teacher professional development focuses on isolated specific activities, processes, or programs, resulting in lists of findings and recommendations that others cannot replicate, are at odds with findings from other studies, or are formulated at a very general level (Timperley and Alton-Lee, 2008). In their literature evaluation, Opfer and Pedder (2011) suggest that research on professional teacher learning be reconceived to better understand the circumstances, reasons, and methods of teacher learning. These authors contend that the present body of literature on teacher learning places too much emphasis on teachers and their activities or programs, leaving out the context of institutions or educational systems. The current study intends to shed light on the interventions primary schools set up to assist, facilitate, and improve the professional development of its teachers. The scope of this study includes the headmaster's level of distributive leadership adoption and implementation as well as the schoolteachers' use of PLC methods. The study strongly emphasizes the headmaster's grasp of and use of distributive leadership in school management. In addition, the study examined how teachers effectively practice in the professional learning community with the assistance of the school administration.

Statement of the Problem
According to earlier research on leadership in education, a school's progress depends heavily on leadership. School administrators will typically bear the burden of addressing the dynamic changes in the educational landscape due to the significance of these changes in classroom academic success (Harun et al., 2016). However, educational leadership's focus has shifted in recent years, and administrators and headmasters are no longer solely responsible for driving school achievement. Although distributive leadership has proven to be an effective model for school management, Harris & Spillane (2008) claim that it is still unknown how a principal should create and apply distributive leadership models in the classroom. There is an extensive research gap between local and international scholars regarding studies on distributive leadership approaches. Local scholars tend to concentrate less emphasis on distributive leadership and more studies on interactional and transformational leadership. As a result, this study was developed after reviewing several earlier studies on leadership that call for modifications to the leadership style in an educational organization (Puspanathan & Mahaliza, 2020). Under the guidance of leaders, using Professional Learning Communities (PLC) can improve teachers' efficacy and effectiveness (Mashira et al., 2019). Consequently, for teachers to be influential group leaders, an organization needs to have a network of best practices and positive interactions among them (Hudson, 2015;Jamail & Don, 2017). The distributive leadership of headmasters in schools serves various other purposes, such as enhancing leadership capacity through fostering initiative and innovation on an unplanned basis (Abdul Rahim & Zahari, 2018). This study will examine this relationship to understand better how headmasters' distributive leadership affects the practice of professional learning communities in Teluk Intan district Tamil national-type primary schools.

Research Questions
This study will answer the following questions: RQ 1: What is the level of distributive leadership practices of principals in schools? RQ 2: What is the professional learning community practice level among school teachers?

Literature Review Distributive Leadership Theory Elmore (2005)
Five concepts make up Elmore's model of distributive leadership, which was introduced in 2005. Distributive leadership approaches include enhancing performance and instructional procedures. Elmore (2005) adds that managing resources is a responsibility of leaders as the knowledge of others around a leader can help the organization. Instead, then requiring a foundational understanding of Leadership, Leadership is a product of experience. Elmore (2005) asserts that leadership techniques must have a distinct direction and emphasis to be effective. The second concept is the need for ongoing learning to improve instruction. This idea focuses on teachers learning together to expand their expertise (Faiz et al., 2016). In addition, according to Elmore (2005), in school organizations, leadership must value collaborative learning. To improve school performance, leaders must foster a climate where teachers can exchange best practices and knowledge. Leaders serve as role models by exhibiting principles and actions that others can follow. A leader must act before expecting others to follow his instructions (Terrell, 2010). When he wants to complete a task in this scenario, the leader will do it using his leadership style. The following principle relates to leadership and organizational performance improvement actions. Elmore (2005) contends that leadership is more of a group effort among the organization's members and is less formally defined. Cooperation is necessary for this knowledge exchange so no one party may dominate. The third principle of this distributive leadership is the ability and accountability for power usage. Bolden (2011) contends that a leader should be ready to react if he requests something from his subordinates. This indicates that before giving instructions to others, a leader must have expertise in the subject matter because one cannot expect everyone to be knowledgeable; the leader must offer a reliable source of information. One might use the power at their disposal to coach and direct leaders to accomplish organizational goals. This can aid in maximizing a person's potential and capacity within their organization.

Professional Learning Community Theory Dufour dan Eaker (1998)
The first of the six fundamental characteristics of Professional Learning Communities (PLC), according to DuFour and Eaker (1998), is the sharing of purpose, vision, and values. This feature strongly emphasizes teachers' dedication to working together under the direction of head teachers. Teachers and administrators will now be closed.
The second is a general interest among teachers in ways to enhance instruction. Curious teachers may have the opportunity to learn something new. The next step is to organize the school's teachers into a cooperative team. Small groups for this collaboration may be necessary for successful learning. Additionally, it gives teachers a place to share their knowledge and grow as professionals. According to DuFour and Eaker (2008), team learning concentrates on organizational reform and instructors' desire to work together in a continuous improvement process. The fourth trait involves acting following a group meeting and being open to adapting. The group of teachers' ongoing improvement is the sixth feature, which comes next. Teachers must be innovative, adopt new strategies, and be prepared to assist students in groups (DuFour & Fullan, 2013). The final principle is decision-oriented, in which all the first actions in this KPP will be assessed, and the effects of knowledge sharing will be shown.

Past studies on Distributive Leadership and Professional learning community practices
In their study, Muda & Hamzah (2018) found a connection between psychological capital and distributive leadership practice in Putrajaya district secondary schools. The study aimed to determine the connection between Putrajaya district teachers' psychological capital and administrators' practices for distributive leadership. The study concluded that distributive leadership is effective for developing positive psychological capital behaviors. There have been principals who have demonstrated distributive leadership or sharing leadership tasks with followers, which is useful because it also trains new principals. Teachers will be more equipped to assume the responsibilities of a principal in the future if they have been exposed to those of a leader. The paper aims to focus on distributed leadership in schools and explore the implications that arise from this leadership model for those in formal leadership positions. It considers how the role of the principal is influenced and changed as leadership is more shared within the organization (Harris, 2011). The analysis focuses primarily on the evidence base of leadership and student-distributed learning outcomes. This analysis of the available evidence highlights the potential of distributed leadership to make a difference in organizational change and improvement. This suggests that principals need to relinquish power and authority, that there is an inevitable shift from leadership as a leadership position to interaction, and that principals need to build high reciprocal trust to successfully consult formal and informal leadership practice guidelines. This paper provides an overview of contemporary literature on the impact of distributed leadership and analyses the implications for the role of school principals. Musimartin Simon (2013) conducted a prior study on professional learning communities. When all members of the school community continuously applied to learn culture-the principal, the second line of leaders, and the teachers-the notion of KPP came into being. The study's conclusions demonstrated that Malaysian secondary schools had accepted the KPP idea at a very high mean frequency level. Using KPP also demonstrated teachers' dedication to implementing school improvement plans and initiatives, particularly in raising student achievement. Additionally, a study titled Professional Learning Community at Community Secondary Schools in Malaysia was carried out by Abdullah and A. Ghani (2014). The findings demonstrated that teachers could take an active role in their education and work to improve their institutions to boost student learning performance during the first four years of secondary school. This characteristic dimension refers to teachers sharing common values, objectives, missions, and visions. It also demonstrated how crucial it is for principals to play a significant role in forming school PLCs to support and mentor teachers.

Research Methodology Research Design
Since the study's respondents were teachers from 12 Tamil national primary schools, the study's design was based on quantitative research. Descriptive statistics were employed in the study, and the researcher used numerical analysis to analyze the data by mean and standard deviation. The survey approach, in which the researcher gave respondents questionnaires, was chosen as the best study strategy for the study.
Population and Sampling 154 teachers who have worked in the chosen 12 Tamil national primary schools under the direction of PPD Hilir Perak made up the study's target population. However, only 113 teachers out of the total 154 teachers were included in the sample. Using a random selection technique, a mix of male and female teachers was used to choose the teachers.

Research Instruments
A developed questionnaire was used for this study. Three sections, which were Sections A, B, and C of this closed-form questionnaire set, were related to respondents' demographics data, distributive Leadership approaches, and professional learning community activities. There were fifty-four questions in total, of which Section A had 4 questions, Section B consisted of 20, and 30 questions made up Section C.

Data Collection Procedures
The researcher has taken several actions to collect the study's data and information to fulfill the study's objectives. The first step in the data collection process was to submit a letter of application asking PPD Teluk Intan, Perak, for permission to conduct the study to acquire consent from the researcher. All the participating schools in the study received the approval letter when it was acquired. In addition, the researcher tried to contact the principals of the concerned schools to request their consent to use the surveys in their institutions. The researcher was able to gather data from the 12 Tamil national schools and count 113 teachers as respondents in total. The teachers received the questionnaires via Telegram and WhatsApp. The researcher next told all responders about the three to five days they had to complete the questionnaires. The researcher used an online Google form to track the number of questionnaires completed after three days. After the fifth day, all questionnaires were collected. The time between distributing the questionnaire and collecting it again was roughly one week. SPSS Version 25 was used to store and analyze the questionnaire data. The findings were examined and presented as a mean and standard deviation. Lastly, the researcher has discussed several points of view regarding the association between the Teluk Intan District's primary school teachers' professional learning communities and a distributive leadership style.

Data Analysis Demographics Profile of Respondent
The study's discussion of the respondent demographic was based on four factors. Gender, race, age, and level of education were the four listed demographic characteristics of the respondents who participated in the study. The age group between 26 and 35 had the highest percentage of respondents, with 40.7%, followed by the age group between 36 and 49 years old, with 33.6%. In addition, the percentages for the youngest person, 25, and the oldest person, 50, are 4.4% and 21.2%, respectively. In the interim, analysis is done on how frequently each gender of respondent engaged in the study. 65.5% of participants are female, compared to 34.5% of males. This also clarified that 39 out of the 74 responses were women. According to a study conducted in Tamil schools, Indians made up most of the respondents.

Result Level of Distributive Leadership Practice
Research at (mean = 3.84, SD = 0.43) indicated that the level of distributive leadership of school administrators was very high, consistent with the findings' overall conclusion. In addition, there were four dimensions in this section, with the first dimension reflecting the school's vision, mission, and goals performing well (mean = 4.02, SD = 0.63) and the second dimension reflecting school culture performing similarly well (mean = 3.69, SD = 0.50).

• Dimension of The Vision, Mission, and Goals of the School
The results demonstrated that the school has a clear vision and an accurate mission statement was at a high level (mean = 4.33, SD = 0.77), while the result showed that teachers and administrators understood and supported the shared mission for the school and can articulate it was also at a high level (mean = 4.09, SD = 0.97). Teachers also concurred that administrators and teachers jointly set school goals and review goals annually, with both finding results at high levels and the same at (mean = 4.02, SD = 0.93), and that schools used school improvement plans as a basis for evaluating the progress made in achieving its goals.
• Dimensions of School Culture Table 1 contains data analyzed to show the principals' level of distributive leadership practices for school culture. Findings at high-level data (mean = 3.98, SD = 0.96), and (mean = 3.85, SD = 0.90), suggested that teachers and administrators had high expectations for students' academic achievement and that schools embraced the novel instructional use of ideas and innovations. In addition, teachers agreed strongly with the statement that schools are learning communities that continuously improve their effectiveness, learning from successes and failures and that the school's daily and weekly schedules give teachers time to collaborate on teaching issues (mean = 3.84, SD = 1.03).

• Dimensions of Responsibility Sharing
The results showed that teachers firmly agreed that school administrators welcome professional staff members to offer input on curriculum, teaching, and student performance improvement. Professional staff members in the school also had a duty to make choices that greatly influenced school meetings (mean = 4.34, SD = 0.77) and (mean = 4.09, SD = 0.97), respectively. Instructors concurred that administrators and teachers shared accountability for students' academic success (mean = 3.80, SD = 1.11) at a high level. In addition, two discoveries with data (mean = 3.41, SD = 1.24) and (mean = 3.65, SD = 1.05) were moderate.
Both findings indicated that instructors had a reasonable level of confidence and respect for the school administration and the professional staff, and that administrators participated in school activities that supported teachers' professional growth.

• Dimensions of Leadership Practice
Teachers overwhelmingly agreed that principals actively encouraged teachers and other staff to participate in instructional decision-making and that the principal actively participated in having professional development activities to improve leadership in the school. The results showed that two statements were at a high level and shared data (mean = 4.02, SD = 0.93). Additionally, teachers concurred that informal school leaders were crucial to raising student achievement and professional performance in schools.

Level of Professional Learning Community Practice Among Teachers in Schools
The second research question was on professional learning community practices among schoolteachers. The findings in Table 4.6 showed that the overall level of professional learning community practices among teachers in the school was high (mean = 3.80, SD = 0.41). The first two dimensions of the professional learning community, which were the dimension of supporting and sharing leadership and the dimension of value sharing, objectives, mission, and vision, also had findings at a high level (mean = 3.85, SD = 0.56) and (mean = 3.75, SD = 0.59) respectively. Apart from that, the dimension of collective learning and application and the dimension of personal learning-sharing practices experienced high-level findings with (mean = 3.86, SD = 0.62) and (mean = 3.90, SD = 0.66), respectively. The remaining two dimensions, the conditional support relationship and the conditional support structure, respectively, recorded high levels of data (mean = 3.73, SD = 0.46) and (mean = 3.72, SD = 0.58).

• Dimension of Supporting and Sharing Leadership
Teachers highly believed that they were guided to be good leaders with data, according to the results in Table 4.7 for the first dimension, which was about supporting and sharing leadership (mean = 4.34, SD = 0.77). In addition, the respondents concurred that teachers consistently participated in discussions to decide on most issues that arose in the school, and the headmaster always provided support when needed. Teachers were always given a chance to make changes.

• Dimension of Value Sharing, Objectives, Mission, and Vision
The school's long-term goals were considered in the planning and execution of teachers' duties, with the data moderated at (mean = 3.65, SD = 1.05) and (mean = 2.98, SD = 1.15), respectively. Finally, the teachers shared a vision for creating schools centered on students' learning.

• Dimension of Collective Learning and Application
Their collaboration reflected their commitment to school improvement with data such as (mean = 3.98, SD = 0.96) and (mean = 3.84, SD = 1.03), respectively. Additionally, the results were given as follows: (mean = 3.85, SD = 0.90), (mean = 3.84, SD = 1.13) and (mean = 3.80, SD = 1.11) accordingly. The results demonstrated that teachers equally well-agreed that each teacher and fellow teacher planned to address students' problems, particularly their needs; collective learning was done through open discussions; and the participation of teachers' discussions sparked various ideas, which led to further exploration.

• Dimension of Personal Learning Sharing Practices
Teachers resoundingly concurred that they consistently gave pertinent replies regarding the teaching methods used by colleagues. Together, they examined student work using data (mean = 4.34, SD = 0.77) and (mean = 4.09, SD = 0.97), respectively, to exchange and enhance teaching methods. Teachers also highly felt they received feedback on their performance (mean = 4.02, SD = 0.93), which they continually used to improve their techniques. There was mutual respect and trust between the school administration and professional staff.
3.4071 1.23662 School administrators welcomed professional staff members to provide input on curriculum, teaching, and student performance improvement issues.

.77472
Professional staff members in the school were responsible for making decisions that influenced the meeting.

.96878
Administrators participated along with teachers in the professional development of school activities.

DIMENSIONS OF LEADERSHIP PRACTICE Mean
Std. Deviation Principals actively encouraged teachers and other staff to participate in instructional decision-making.

4.0177
.92565 The principal actively participated in professional development activities to enhance school leadership.

.87609
Principals were knowledgeable about current teaching problems.
2.9823 1.14940 Informal school leaders played an important role in schools to improve their schools' professional performance and students' achievements.

.96346
New teachers were allowed to fill several school leadership roles. Teachers analyzed students' work together to share and improve their teaching practices.

.96878
Teachers tried out ideas that they shared in their classrooms. 3.6460 1.05153 Teachers got feedback about their performances to continuously improve their teaching practices.

Discussion
The two specified research questions were connected to the key constructs described in this section. The study's modified conclusions were based on the headmasters' level of distributive leadership and the teachers' level of participation in professional learning communities. The conversation was then focused on how elementary school teachers in the Teluk Intan district implement professional learning communities and the distributive leadership of headmasters.

Level of Distributive Leadership Practices of Principals in Schools
Overall, the conversations focused on the four components of distributive leadership: school culture, responsibility sharing, leadership practices, and the school's vision, mission, and goals. The overall results for distributive leadership were quite favorable, consistent with (Hall & Demarco, 2018). A similar finding by Puspanathan and Mahaliza (2020) also demonstrated that all the dimensions were high.

• Dimension of The Vision, Mission, and Goals of the School
The researcher discovered that the school's vision, mission, and goals were high by referring to the first dimension in distributive leadership of headmasters. The results of this study concurred with those of a study by Balakrishnan and Wahab (2018), which discovered that the school's vision, mission, and goals were all at a high level. The results also demonstrated that instructors supported the school's having a precise mission statement and a clear vision.
The joint mission of the school was well recognized, supported, and communicated by both teachers and administrators. The findings of Yusoff et al (2016), which indicated a remarkable knowledge and support sharing among the school administration and teachers towards realizing the school's vision and mission, provided strong support for the outcome.
The study by Teng and Hamzah (2016) also discovered that the school's vision, mission, and goals were high caliber by emphasizing that schools employed school improvement plans as a foundation for assessing progress in reaching its objectives. Additionally, it was determined that instructors concurred with the result that administrators and teachers jointly developed school goals and reviewed them annually (Rabindarang and Bing, 2015).

• Dimensions of School Culture
The outcome made it very evident that school culture was at a high level. The findings indicated that both instructors and administrators had high standards for students' academic success. The findings of Yusoff et al (2015), which also indicated a high level of school culture, corroborated the findings. In addition, the findings demonstrated that teachers favored turning schools into learning environments where people can share achievements and failures and continually improve their performance. The results, however, were in line with Muda and Hamzah (2018), who discovered that teachers openly supported schools using new ideas and innovations in education. This demonstrated that the school administration was constantly prepared to support the teachers' creativity and original ideas while also developing the school's culture.
The study's results were consistent with those of Balakrishnan and Wahab (2018), who found the same thing regarding the dimension of school culture. The results showed that teachers concurred that the school's daily and weekly timetables gave them time to work together on instructional issues. Gronn (2002) also described the distributive leadership paradigm as being integrated into an action encompassing institutional practices, intuitive working relationships, and spontaneous or planned collaboration. This can be combined with the study's result that instructors agreed that the school always supported their ideas and collaborated to improve the children's academic achievement.

• Dimensions of Responsibility Sharing
The outcome indicated that teachers recognized and concurred that they and the administrators shared responsibility for students' academic outcomes based on the responsibility-sharing dimension. This is probably achievable because the management team consistently shared responsibilities with the teachers and concentrated on the accomplishments of all students. The clear-cut findings in the study were also reproduced in research by Ahmad and Hamzah (2017), in which the conclusion was at a high level for the responsibility-sharing dimensions. The findings showed that school administrators valued professional staff members' opinions on curriculum, instruction, and student performance enhancement. This demonstrated that teachers were allowed to demonstrate their aptitude and expertise.
In addition, teachers firmly thought that professional staff members in the school had a duty to make choices that affected meetings at the school, and this conclusion was backed by the finding of (Thien and Tan, 2019). In addition, Muda and Hamzah (2018) discovered that the dimension of responsibility sharing was moderate, contrary to the current study's results.
In addition, it was discovered that instructors tended to be somewhat moderate, that the school administration and professional staff had a sense of mutual respect and trust, and that some administrators participated in professional development activities at the school alongside teachers (Canterino et al., 2020).

• Dimensions of Leadership Practice
According to the fourth dimension, the level of leadership practices was judged to be high. In addition, the survey noted that instructors supported aggressively promoting participation in instructional decision-making among themselves and other staff members. In general, the leaders showed excellent leadership abilities as they utilized the teachers' knowledge to make judgments while gathering as many ideas as possible. This was also supported by a study by Harris (2011) that came to a similar conclusion and demonstrated a high degree of leadership practices. According to the research, the principal actively participated in professional development events that aimed to improve leadership in the school.
In addition, Muda and Hamzah (2018) discovered a comparable result when the dimension of leadership behaviors was high. The research supported teachers' consensus that informal school leaders were crucial to raising professional standards and student outcomes. Additionally, Hamzah (2016) discovered something like what the current study found: new teachers were allowed to take on various leadership positions at their schools. Teachers, however, had mixed feelings about principals' familiarity with current issues in education, indicating that they need to learn more about teachers (Puspanathan and Mahaliza, 2020). This aligns with Elmore's distributive leadership theory, which argues that cooperation is necessary to ensure that no one party dominates the knowledge exchange.

Level of Professional Learning Community Practice Among Teachers in Schools
The level of professional learning community practices among schoolteachers was the subject of the second study question, and the findings indicated a high level. Abdullah (2020), who also discovered the same high level, supported the conclusion strongly. Additionally, the results demonstrated that all aspects of the professional learning community were finished at a high level. The four components were: supporting and sharing leadership; sharing values; aims, mission, and vision; collective learning and application; and sharing techniques from one's learning.

• Dimension of Supporting and Sharing Leadership
The findings indicated that teachers were consistent in their participation in conversations to reach choices on most issues that arise in the school. The investigation by Tahir et al (2013), reproduced the simple conclusion of the original study. The study discovered that teachers participated actively in important school debates and decision-making. Mahimuang (2018) concurred and added that teachers were allowed to make modifications and that headmasters helped when required. This conclusion and the current study's findings made it abundantly evident that instructors agreed to be given opportunities to seize, and that headmasters' support was anonymous when it was truly needed (Amels et al., 2020).
A finding by Faiz et al (2016) showing instructors were also well-guided to be good leaders provided more support for the conclusion. The fact that headmasters shared power and authority with teachers democratically was also mildly moderated in the eyes of the instructors. Another study by Simon et al (2014) emphasized that there was a perception that the leader had not divided the tasks among the professors effectively. The current research findings align with Dufour's professional learning community theory and Eaker, whereby teachers agreed that they were always in hand with the management to achieve the school goals and the headmasters guided the teachers to become effective leaders. This theory emphasizes collective commitment among teachers with the guidance of head teachers (Ahmad & Hamid, 2021).

• Dimension of Value Sharing, Objectives, Mission, and Vision
Sunaengsih et al (2020) research provided strong evidence for the second component of value sharing, aims, mission, and vision 2020. The results demonstrated that school personnel shared behaviors that supported teacher norms and attitudes in decisions relating to teaching and learning. This was in line with another study by Dehdary (2017), which discovered that teachers agreed with the claim that decisions were made following the school's values, mission, and vision and their involvement in creating school mission trips.
In addition, the current findings revealed teachers' mixed feelings on the development of schools that prioritized kids' learning. The planning and implementation of the instructors' responsibilities took the school's long-term goals into account. The outcome demonstrated that teachers still had concerns regarding the long-term goals and their ability to implement the plan flawlessly. Faiz et al (2016) supported this finding. Additionally, Hord highlighted in the professional learning community module that teachers must support the vision and goal and actively organize activities to carry out those objectives.

• Dimension of Collective Learning and Application
The outcome for group learning and application has likewise been highly effective. The results were in line with those of Puspanathan & Mahaliza (2020), who discovered that the dimension of collective learning and application has also been high, with teachers agreeing that they can discover and try different teaching techniques in the classroom cooperatively. In addition, research revealed that teachers concur that cooperation among teachers amply demonstrates their dedication to improving schools. These findings are also confirmed by (Faiz et al., 2016). In addition, teachers concurred that each teacher has plans to address students' difficulties, particularly their needs.
Additionally, the study discovered that teachers firmly believed that group learning is always accomplished through open debate. However, the results of Hamzah and Jamil (2019) (2020) revealed that teachers firmly agreed that teacher talks between themselves produced a variety of ideas that prompted additional investigation; this conclusion is like the one from the current study.

• Dimension of Personal Learning Sharing Practices
The component of personal learning-sharing sharing practices produced high-level results, which were also corroborated by Hamzah's research 2016. The findings indicated that teachers firmly agreed always to offer pertinent comments regarding the teaching methods used by colleagues. This result is consistent with another study by Hassan and Ismail (2020), which discovered that the dimension of personal learning-sharing practices was quite high. Additionally, the research by R. Hassan et al. provided strong support for teachers who consented to continuously receive feedback on their performances to improve their practices 2018.
Another research conclusion revealed that teachers were reluctant to say they always provide their coworkers with criticism on their teaching techniques and were tempered in their responses. These incredible results demonstrated that teachers' attitudes toward providing and accepting feedback varied greatly. The outcome aligned with Faiz and colleagues' (2016) studies. Musimartin Simon (2013) also discovered that teachers were hesitant to try out ideas they should share in their classes, indicating that the dimension of personal learning-sharing practices was modest. This discovery is consistent with recent research. To motivate and satisfy our employees, we need to employ new leadership behaviors (Aslam et al., 2022)

Recommendations
One of the main recommendations is for future researchers to concentrate on a cluster or high-performing schools or extend the study in primary schools to secondary schools. The study can potentially be expanded to include universities in addition to colleges. In addition, the study should be expanded from a single district to several distinct districts or perhaps to entire states. The study can easily be expanded to include a number more states. In addition, secondary schools, which frequently have more major leadership problems or problems with teacher collaboration, as well as technical institutions and universities, can benefit from the study's findings. A comparison between high-performing, cluster, and conventional day schools can also be drawn. Comparing national schools, Chinese national type schools and Tamil national type schools can be used for the study. The study can then be expanded based on the gender of head teachers or teachers to examine differences and connections between professional learning community activities and the degree of distributive leadership. To receive more honest input from the teachers, the future researcher can finally switch the research methodology from quantitative to qualitative or mixed methods.

Conclusion
The diversity of leadership styles and levels displayed by headmasters recently and how this affects teachers' ability to accomplish their tasks have been the subject of much discussion.
Although the study only pertains to elementary schools and only focuses on one district, the results demonstrate that teachers and headmasters engage in high levels of professional learning communities and have a high degree of distributive leadership. As a result, there is a significant impact of the high level of distributive leadership on the practices of professional learning communities among teachers. It can be concluded that the practices of the primary school teachers' professional learning community in the Teluk Intan district are influenced by the headmasters' level of distributive leadership.