[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
Articles archive::
For Authors::
For Reviewers::
Registration::
Contact us::
Site Facilities::
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
:: Volume 14, Issue 1 (3-2025) ::
MEO 2025, 14(1): 157-186 Back to browse issues page
Identifying and Explaining the Model of Teachers' Professional Learning Networks Using Meta-synthesis and Fuzzy Delphi Approach
Javad Ahmadiaghdam * , ALI Khalegkhah , Adel Zahedbabelan , Husein Taqavi
Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Mohaghegh Ardabili University, Ardabil, Iran
Abstract:   (1580 Views)

Professional learning networks are a relatively new field of study, and we need more information about the basic processes of teachers' learning in these networks and their dimensions and key features. The current research was conducted with the aim of identifying the dimensions and components of the model of professional learning networks of elementary teachers and presenting a conceptual model. The data of the research were collected with the help of Meta-synthesis approach and based on the six-step model of Sandelowski and Barroso (2006). In this regard, in various databases, related articles were searched in the time frame (2005-2024) and finally, among 171 articles, 35 articles were selected in a targeted manner and with the help of the Evaluation Skills Program (CASP) entered into the analysis. Next, the fuzzy Delphi technique was used to refine dimensions and components. 20 experts participated in two survey stages, and the results of each stage were screened. In general, 308 codes were extracted from the studied sources, and these codes were placed in 15 concepts and 3 main categories. The concepts included: valuing people, change occurrence, enabling, discovering, learning development, progress, skills, sharing, collective presence, involvement, evaluation, student-centeredness, systematicity, interactions and support. They were included in three categories: individual, group and organization. Finally, the conceptual model of teachers' professional learning networks was formed. The findings show that networks are an effective tool for realizing teachers' learning and improving teaching-learning processes

Article number: 6
Keywords: Modeling, Professional Learning Networks, Meta-synthesis, Elementary Teachers
Full-Text [PDF 909 kb]   (188 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: managing education in education
Received: 2024/10/6 | Accepted: 2025/03/13
References
1. Akiva, T., & Robinson, K. H. (2022). It takes an ecosystem: Understanding the people, places, and possibilities of learning and development across settings. IAP.
2. Anderson, S., Manion, C., Drinkwater, M., Chande, R., & Galt, W. (2019). Looking for learning in teacher learning networks in Kenya. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 4(2), 124-146.‏ [DOI:10.1108/JPCC-07-2018-0020]
3. Azorín, C. (2018). The emergence of professional learning networks in Spain. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 4(1), 36-51. [DOI:10.1108/JPCC-03-2018-0012]
4. Banerjee, N., Stearns, E., Moller, S., & Mickelson, R. A. (2017). Teacher job satisfaction and student achievement: The roles of teacher professional community and teacher collaboration in schools. American Journal of Education, 123(2), 000-000. [DOI:10.1086/689932]
5. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2014). Teachers know best: Teachers' views on professional development. ERIC Clearinghouse.
6. Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational researcher, 33(8), 3-15. [DOI:10.3102/0013189X033008003]
7. Broadley, T., Martin, R., & Curtis, E. (2019). Rethinking professional experience through a learning community model: Toward a culture change. Frontiers in Education. [DOI:10.3389/feduc.2019.00022]
8. Brown, C. (2023), "Exploring the current context for professional learning networks, the conditions for their success, and research needs moving forwards", Emerald Open Research, Vol. 1 No. 3. [DOI:10.1108/EOR-03-2023-0001]
9. Brown, C., & Flood, J. (2020). The three roles of school leaders in maximizing the impact of Professional Learning Networks: A case study from England. International Journal of Educational Research, 99, 101516. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijer.2019.101516]
10. Brown, C., & Poortman, C. (2018). Networks for learning: Effective collaboration for teacher, school and system improvement. Routledge.
11. Brown, C., Flood, J., Armstrong, P., MacGregor, S., & Chinas, C. (2021). Is distributed leadership an effective approach for mobilizing professional capital across professional learning networks? Exploring a case from England. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 6(1), 64-78. [DOI:10.1108/JPCC-02-2020-0010]
12. Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America's schools can get better at getting better. Harvard Education Press.
13. Calvert, L. (2016). Moving from compliance to agency: What teachers need to make professional learning work. Oxford, OH: Learning Forward and NCTAF.
14. Campbell, C. (2017). Developing teachers' professional learning: Canadian evidence and experiences in a world of educational improvement. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l'éducation, 40(2), 1-33.
15. Campbell, C., Osmond-Johnson, P., Faubert, B., Zeichner, K., Hobbs-Johnson, A., Brown, S., DaCosta, P., Hales, A., Kuehn, L., Sohn, J. and Steffensen, K. (2016), "The state of educators' professional learning in Canada: final research report", Learning Forward, Oxford.
16. Chapman, C. (2008). Towards a framework for school-to-school networking in challenging circumstances. Educational research, 50(4), 403-420. [DOI:10.1080/00131880802499894]
17. Chapman, C., & Muijs, D. (2013). Collaborative school turnaround: A study of the impact of school federations on student outcomes. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 12(3), 200-226. [DOI:10.1080/15700763.2013.831456]
18. Chapman, C., & Muijs, D. (2014). Does school-to-school collaboration promote school improvement? A study of the impact of school federations on student outcomes. School effectiveness and school improvement, 25(3), 351-393. [DOI:10.1080/09243453.2013.840319]
19. Chapman, C., & Sammons, P. (2013). School Self-Evaluation for School Improvement: What Works and Why?. CfBT Education Trust. 60 Queens Road, Reading, RG1 4BS, England.‏
20. Cheng, C. H., & Lin, Y. (2002). Evaluating the best main battle tank using fuzzy decision theory with linguistic criteria evaluation. European journal of operational research 142(1), 174-186. [DOI:10.1016/S0377-2217(01)00280-6]
21. Chitpin, S. (2014). Principals and the professional learning community: Learning to mobilize knowledge. International Journal of Educational Management, 28(2), 215-229. [DOI:10.1108/IJEM-04-2013-0044]
22. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Chapter 8: Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of research in education, 24(1), 249-305. [DOI:10.3102/0091732X024001249]
23. Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession. Washington, DC: National Staff Development Council, 12(10).
24. Davis, K. (2015). Teachers' perceptions of Twitter for professional development. Disability and Rehabilitation, 37(17), 1551-1558.‏ [DOI:10.3109/09638288.2015.1052576]
25. Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers' professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational researcher, 38(3), 181-199. [DOI:10.3102/0013189X08331140]
26. Díaz-Gibson, J., Zaragoza, M. C., Daly, A. J., Mayayo, J. L., & Romaní, J. R. (2017). Networked leadership in educational collaborative networks. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(6), 1040-1059. [DOI:10.1177/1741143216628532]
27. Draper, D. P. (2014). Guiding the work of professional learning communities: Perspectives for school leaders. Dissertations and Theses. Paper 1823.
28. Feys, E., & Devos, G. (2015). What comes out of incentivized collaboration: A qualitative analysis of eight Flemish school networks. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 43(5), 738-754. [DOI:10.1177/1741143214535738]
29. Gandomi, F., & Sajjadi, S. (2016). Digital turn and its implications on teacher's professional achievement: learning communities' formation among teachers. Technology of Education Journal (TEJ), 10(3), 175-191. [in Persian]
30. Gatz, E., & Akiva, T. (2024). Education networks for deeper learning. Journal of Educational Administration, 62(1), 91-102. [DOI:10.1108/JEA-02-2023-0043]
31. Gonzalez, A., Pino, M., & Smoked, L. (2017). Transit from school improvement to systemic improvement: Opportunities and challenges of school networks in Chile. Chile: Leadership Center for School Improvement.‏Chapman, C., & Sammons, P. (2013). School Self-Evaluation for School Improvement: What Works and Why? ERIC.
32. Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2010). Professional learning communities and system improvement. Improving schools, 13(2), 172-181. [DOI:10.1177/1365480210376487]
33. Hoon, C. (2013). Meta-synthesis of qualitative case studies: An approach to theory building. Organizational research methods, 16(4), 522-556. [DOI:10.1177/1094428113484969]
34. Judy, L. L. H., Rahmet, R. B., Heng, L. P., Li, L., & Hwee, T. T. (2018). Online knowledge construction in networked learning communities. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Networked Learning (pp. 373-380).‏ [DOI:10.54337/nlc.v11.8785]
35. Katz, S., & Earl, L. (2010). Learning about networked learning communities. School effectiveness and school improvement, 21(1), 27-51. [DOI:10.1080/09243450903569718]
36. Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How Does Professional Development Improve Teaching? Review of educational research, 86(4), 945-980. [DOI:10.3102/0034654315626800]
37. Kools, M., & Stoll, L. (2016). What makes a school a learning organisation? OECD Education Working Papers, No. 137, OECD Publishing, Paris.
38. Ladwig, J. G. (2014). Theoretical notes on the sociological analysis of school reform networks. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 35(3), 371-388. [DOI:10.1080/01425692.2013.776931]
39. Leithwood, K. (2019). Characteristics of effective leadership networks: A replication and extension. School Leadership & Management, 39(2), 175-197. [DOI:10.1080/13632434.2018.1470503]
40. Luo, J., Luo, L., Yang, A., Cui, M., & Ma, H. (2023). Clinical experiences of final-year nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-synthesis. Nurse Education Today, 120, 105633. [DOI:10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105633]
41. Macià, M., & García, I. (2016). Informal online communities and networks as a source of teacher professional development: A review. Teaching and teacher education, 55, 291-307. [DOI:10.1016/j.tate.2016.01.021]
42. Mackey, J., & Evans, T. (2011). Interconnecting networks of practice for professional learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(3), 1-18. [DOI:10.19173/irrodl.v12i3.873]
43. Moreillon, J. (2016). Building your personal learning network (PLN): 21st-century school librarians seek self-regulated professional development online. Knowledge Quest, 44(3), 64-69.
44. Muijs, D. (2015). Improving schools through collaboration: a mixed methods study of school-to-school partnerships in the primary sector. Oxford Review of Education, 41(5), 563-586. [DOI:10.1080/03054985.2015.1047824]
45. Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies (Vol. 11). sage. [DOI:10.4135/9781412985000]
46. Nussbaum-Beach, S. (2013). Just the Facts: PLNS. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(7), 16-17. [DOI:10.1177/003172171309400705]
47. Oddone, K., Hughes, H., & Lupton, M. (2019). Teachers as connected professionals: A model to support professional learning through personal learning networks. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20)3). [DOI:10.19173/irrodl.v20i4.4082]
48. OECD. (2014). TALIS 2013 Results: An International Perspective on Teaching and Learning, TALIS, OECD Publishing.
49. Pedersen, J. M., Long, C. E., Hollweck, T. A., & Kim, M. J. (2024). Professional learning in global networks: lessons from ARC. Journal of Educational Change, 25(2), 271-303. [DOI:10.1007/s10833-023-09492-8]
50. Prestridge, S. (2017). Conceptualising self-generating online teacher professional development. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(1), 85-104. [DOI:10.1080/1475939X.2016.1167113]
51. Prestridge, S. (2019). Categorising teachers' use of social media for their professional learning: A self-generating professional learning paradigm. Computers & Education, 129, 143-158. [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.11.003]
52. Rafai, Z., Hasani, R., & Mohammadi, M. (2020). Dimensions and components of professional learning communities: A qualitative study. School Administration, 8(1), 369-341. [in Persian]
53. Rahdary, A., & Nasr, M. (2017). Challenges of Think Tanks in Iran. Management and Development Process, 30(2), 23-54. [in Persian]
54. Rauch, F. (2016). Networking for education for sustainable development in Austria: the Austrian ECOLOG-schools programme. Educational Action Research, 24(1), 34-45. [DOI:10.1080/09650792.2015.1132000]
55. Rincón-Gallardo, S., & Fullan, M. (2016). Essential features of effective networks in education. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 1(1), 5-22. [DOI:10.1108/JPCC-09-2015-0007]
56. Sahlberg, P. (2011). Paradoxes of educational improvement: The Finnish experience. Scottish Educational Review, 43(1), 3-23. [DOI:10.1163/27730840-04301002]
57. Salehi, M., Ghanbarian, P., & Vakili, D. (2020). The understanding and experience of school teachers from the concept of professional capital is a phenomenological study. School Administration, 8(2), 217-203. [in Persian]
58. Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2006). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. Springer Publishing Company.
59. Schnellert, L., & Butler, D. L. (2021). Exploring the potential of collaborative teaching nested within professional learning networks. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 6(2), 99-116. [DOI:10.1108/JPCC-06-2020-0037]
60. Spring, J., Frankson, J. E., McCallum, C. A., & Banks, D. P. (2017). The business of education: Networks of power and wealth in America. Taylor & Francis. [DOI:10.4324/9781315465418]
61. 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. [DOI:10.1007/s10833-006-0001-8]
62. Timperley, H., & Alton-Lee, A. (2008). Reframing teacher professional learning: An alternative policy approach to strengthening valued outcomes for diverse learners. Review of research in education, 32(1), 328-369. [DOI:10.3102/0091732X07308968]
63. Timperley, H., Kaser, L., & Halbert, J. (2014). A framework for transforming learning in schools: Innovation and the spiral of inquiry (Vol. 234). Melbourne: Centre for Strategic Education.
64. Tour, E. (2017). Teachers' personal learning networks (PLNs): Exploring the nature of self‐initiated professional learning online. Literacy, 51(1), 11-18. [DOI:10.1111/lit.12101]
65. Trust, T. (2017). Using Cultural Historical Activity Theory to Examine How Teachers Seek and Share Knowledge in a Peer-to-Peer Professional Development Network. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 98-113. [DOI:10.14742/ajet.2593]
66. Trust, T., Krutka, D. G., & Carpenter, J. P. (2016). "Together we are better": Professional learning networks for teachers. Computers & Education, 102, 15-34. [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.06.007]
67. Van den Beemt, A., Ketelaar, E., Diepstraten, I., & de Laat, M. (2018). Teachers' motives for learning in networks: costs, rewards, and community interest. Educational research, 60(1), 31-46. [DOI:10.1080/00131881.2018.1426391]
68. Van den Bergh, L., Ros, A., & Beijaard, D. (2014). Improving teacher feedback during active learning: Effects of a professional development program. American Educational Research Journal, 51(4), 772-809. [DOI:10.3102/0002831214531322]
69. Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raes, E., & Kyndt, E. (2015). Teacher collaboration: A systematic review. Educational research review, 15, 17-40. [DOI:10.1016/j.edurev.2015.04.002]
70. Vangrieken, K., Meredith, C., Packer, T., & Kyndt, E. (2017). Teacher communities as a context for professional development: A systematic review. Teaching and teacher education, 61, 47-59. [DOI:10.1016/j.tate.2016.10.001]
71. Walsh, D., & Downe, S. (2005). Meta‐synthesis method for qualitative research: a literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 50(2), 204-211. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03380.x]
72. Warlick, D. (2009). Grow your personal learning network: New technologies can keep you connected and help you manage information overload. Learning & leading with technology, 36(6), 12-16.
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA


XML   Persian Abstract   Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Ahmadiaghdam J, Khalegkhah A, Zahedbabelan A, Taqavi H. Identifying and Explaining the Model of Teachers' Professional Learning Networks Using Meta-synthesis and Fuzzy Delphi Approach. MEO 2025; 14 (1) : 6
URL: http://journalieaa.ir/article-1-764-en.html


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 14, Issue 1 (3-2025) Back to browse issues page
نشریه مدیریت بر آموزش سازمان ها Journal of Managing Education in Organizations

 
 
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.14 seconds with 37 queries by YEKTAWEB 4725