1. Online Professional Learning Communities for K-12 Teachers
Jennie Larry Johnson, M.S. Learning Techologies, May 6, 2019

2. About me… Jennie Larry Johnson
Ph.D. Student, Learning Technologies
Workforce Development Specialist and “Bronze Certified” Training Evaluator
38+ years – Training, Performance Improvement, Human Resource Development, and Human Resource Management
M.S. – Learning Technologies: University of North Texas
Ph.D. Student – Learning Technologies: University of North Texas
CLEAR Graduate Associate, Graduate Student Excellence Program (GSTEP) Mentor

3. What are Professional Learning Communities? (PLCs)
PLCs are formal or informal situations where like-minded professionals engage in collaborative learning (Smith, Hayes, & Shea, 2017)
Collaborative learning does improve participants’ knowledge, skills and abilities (Bandura, 2001; Vygotsky, 1978; Wegner-Trayner, 2002)
PLC involvement can range from:
Face-to-face mentoring sessions
Small group workshops
Large group conferences
Interactive and virtual social media chats
Online PLCs are a rapidly growing global phenomenon

4. What does this mean for Education?
“No Child Left Behind Act” requires …
“… a comprehensive, sustained, and intensive approach to improving teachers’ and principals’ effectiveness …”
This means school districts are required to offer professional development programs that …
“…increase their teachers’ ability to improve student learning outcomes.” (Great Schools Partnership, 2013)

5. Online teacher PLCs studies show...
Use of online PLCs for teacher professional development is gaining teacher support (Chappuis, Chappuis, & Stiggins, 2009; DuFour).
Teachers have reported benefits from collaborative engagement in online PLCs (Lave & Wenger, 1991).
Administrators have reported online PLCs offer a cost-effective alternative to traditional workshops and seminars (Anwauddin, 2015; Ballenger, 2009).

6. Based on these findings, …
Few would argue online PLCs have the potential to a create paradigm shift for teacher professional development (Beach, 2012; Hargreaves, 2007; Talbert, 2010)
Most agree poorly designed, carelessly executed, or irrelevant online PLCs are waste of teachers’ valuable time (Anwauddin, 2015; Ballenger, 2009; Blitz, 2013)
Need to take a closer look at the research to identify replicable models for online PLCs for wider application (Guri-Rosenblit & Gros, 2011)
Systematic literature review of existing online PLCs for teacher

7. Research Question
Are online PLCs an effective alternative to traditional teacher professional development workshops and seminars?

8. Definitions
Professional Learning Communities (PLCs): A group of educators that meet regularly, share expertise, and work collaboratively to improve their knowledge and skills (Great Schools Partnership, 2014)
Online Professional Learning Communities: PLCs whose interactions are conducted at least 65% or more of the time online (Great Schools Partnership, 2013).
Micro-level research: Examinations of research participants engaged in activities
Meso-level research: Examinations of group interactions, infrastructure, and/or institutional systems
Macro-level research: Examinations of organizational, their culture, and their values, morals, and collective identities

9. Systematic Literature Review Process
Conducted from September - December, 2018
Cooper’s Taxonomy exhaustive coverage with selection criteria
Searched for and examined macro, meso, and micro studies on online PLCs directed toward teachers
Collected and analyzed quantitative, qualitative, theoretical, and economic literature
Synthesized results from large- and small-scale experiments separately then collectively
Results was used to make inferences, conclusions, and recommendations
Noted limitations during the study

10. Search Terms and Screening Criteria
Table 1:
ERIC Database Keyword Search Terms and Results
Search Terms
Results
S1: Personalized learning communities 29
S2: e-Learning in America 8
S3: Teacher e-learning 3
S4: Online teacher communities
145
S5: Teacher online professional development
240
S6: Teacher e-learning
125
Total Keyword Search Results
550
ERIC database
Google Scholar
550 works identified
145 abstracts reviewed

11. Exclusions Not included: Table 2. Literature Exclusions by Reason
E1: Duplicates 6
E2: Off topic 33
E3: Not USA teacher exclusive 54
E4: Unavailable at time of search 11
Total Literature Exclusions
104
Not included:

12. Literature Selection, Collection, and Organization
41 works selected
Organized in MS Access 2016
Coded by classification

13. Coding: Research Hierarchy
Table 3.
 Literature Coding and Weights by Classification
Search Terms
Results
L1: Systematic literature reviews 2
L2: Quantitative large studies (n=>35 sample size) 7
L3: Quantitative small studies (n=<35 sample size)
L4: Qualitative large studies (n=>35 sample size) 4
L5: Qualitative small studies (n=<35 sample size) 10
L6: Seminal, theoretical, dissertation works 15
L7: Governmental/economic reports 1
Total Literature Exclusions 41
Macro-Level
Meso-Level
Micro-Level
Theoretical
Organizational Impact
Infrastructure and Systematic Impact
Operational Impact
Hypothesis Testing

14. Literature Selected by Classification
Aligned independent and dependent variables
Identified mediators and moderator influencers
Analyzed by impact and generalizability for replication

15. Examinations: Quantitative Studies
7 large-scale (n ≥ 35) and 2 small-scale (n < 35)
Composite effect size: 53 K-12 teachers.
Most: Self-report data
Most: Micro-focused on teacher participation and engagement
Synthesized findings: Teachers implied benefits from engagement in online PLCs

16. Examinations: Qualitative Studies
4 large-scale (n ≥ 35) and 11 small-scale (n < 35)
Composite effect size: 1,464 K-12 teachers
Most: self-report data
Most: Micro-focused on teacher participation and engagement
Findings:
Overall: Beneficial
Peer emotional support and professional development
Some: “I did not learning anything new.”
Others reported “just go along with it” or felt the need to “conform”

17. Influencing Mediators and Moderators
Mediators and moderators identified:
Voluntary or mandatory participation
OJT time allowances
Hours and levels of engagement
Administrative supports
Training durations
Budget allowances

18. Results and Implications
Discussion:
Contradictory findings
Conflicts in terminology
Gaps in research
Limited research at systems (meso) and supports (macro) levels

19. Recommendations Future research:
Close gaps in research related to PLC online groups, systems, infrastructure, and best practices (meso examinations)
Close gaps in research related needed administrative supports and cost benefits for online PLCs (macro examinations)
Resolve inconsistencies, conflicting theories and terminologies, and reliable data collection methods

20. Limitations Limited to UNT EBSCOHost or Google Scholar
Limited to ERIC database only
Limited to English works only
Limited to U.S. teacher studies only
Limited to 3-month research period
Limited to perspective of one principal investigator

21. Closing Remarks
America must continue its fight to education its children.
The battlefield:
K-12 classrooms
The soldiers:
America’s teachers
The weapon:
Good research that leads to quality teacher professional development programs

22. Thank you! Jennie Larry Johnson M.S. – Learning Technologies
URL:
Telephone:

23. References (1 of 4)
Anwaruddin, S. M. (2015). Teacher professional learning in online communities: toward existentially reflective practice. Reflective Practice, 16(6),
Ballenger, C. (2009). Ann Lieberman and Lynne Miller, Eds.: Teachers in professional communities: Improving teaching and learning.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 1-26.Bostancioglu, A. (2016). Factors Affecting English as a Foreign Language Teachers’ Participation in Online Communities of Practice: The Case of Webheads in Action. Online Submission, 4, 20–35.
Baratta, D. G. (2012, January 1). THE EFFECTS OF ONLINE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN TECHNOLOGY WITH VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE ON TEACHERS’ ATTITUDES AND CONTENT INTEGRATION.
Beach, R. (2012). Can online learning communities foster professional development?. Language Arts, 89(4), 256.
Blitz, C. L. (2013). Can Online Learning Communities Achieve the Goals of Traditional Professional Learning Communities? What the Literature Says. REL Regional Educational Laboratory Mid-Atlantic.
Boyd, A., Gorham, J. J., Justice, J. E., & Anderson, J. L. (2013). Examining the Apprenticeship of Observation with Preservice Teachers: The Practice of Blogging to Facilitate Autobiographical Reflection and Critique. Teacher Education Quarterly, 40(3), 27–49.
Carr, N., & Chambers, D. P. (2006). Teacher Professional Learning in an Online Community: The Experiences of the National Quality Schooling Framework Pilot Project. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 15(2), 143–157.
Chappuis, S., Chappuis, J., & Stiggins, R. (2009). Supporting teacher learning teams. Educational Leadership, 66(5), 56–60. Colgan, L., Higginson, W., & Sinclair, N. (1999). Transforming Professional Development: An Empirical Study To Determine the Key Aspects of Electronic Collaboration and Social Interaction in the Elementary Mathematics Teaching Community. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 45(3), 315–19.
Cooper, H. (2017). Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis: A Step-by-Step Approach (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
deNoyelles, A., & Raider-Roth, M. (2016). Being an “Agent Provocateur”: Utilising Online Spaces for Teacher Professional Development in Virtual Simulation Games. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 25(3), 337–353.
DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & DuFour, R. (2005). Recurring themes of professional learning communities and the assumptions they challenge. In R. DuFour, R. Eaker, & R. DuFour (Eds.), On common ground: The power of professional learning communities (pp. 7–30). Bloomington, IN: National Educational Services.

24. References (2 of 4)
Frumin, K., Dede, C., Fischer, C., Foster, B., Lawrenz, F., Eisenkraft, A., … McCoy, A. (2018). Adapting to Large-Scale Changes in Advanced Placement Biology, Chemistry, and Physics: The Impact of Online Teacher Communities. International Journal of Science Education, 40(4), 397–420.
Guri-Rosenblit, S., & Gros, B. (2011). E-learning: Confusing terminology, research gaps and inherent challenges. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 25(1).
Gutierrez, C., & Bryan, C. (2010). Online Community becomes a Pathway to Teacher Leadership. Journal of Staff Development, 31(1), 42–47.
Habermas, J. r. (2015). Theory of communicative action.: (Reason and the rationalization of society). United States: Polity Press.
Hargreaves, A. (2007). Sustainable professional learning communities. In L. Stoll & K. S. Louis (Eds.), Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas (pp. 181– 196). Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.
Havelock, B. (2004). Online Community and Professional Learning in Education: Research-Based Keys to Sustainability. AACE Journal, 12(1), 56–84.
Hodes, C., Pritz, S., Kelley, P., & Foster, J. (2011). Developing an Online Community of In-Service Teachers. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE Journal), 11(3), 313–323.
Hur, J. W., & Brush, T. A. (2009). Teacher Participation in Online Communities: Why Do Teachers Want to Participate in Self-Generated Online Communities of K-12 Teachers? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(3), 279–303.
Kulavuz-Onal, D. (2013, January 1). English Language Teachers’ Learning to Teach with Technology through Participation in an Online Community of Practice: A Netnography of Webheads in Action.
Laferriere, T., Breuleux, A., & Bracewell, R. (2000). Collaborative Inquiries into the Networked Classroom.
Lauer, P. A., Stoutemyer, K. L., Van Buhler, R. J., & Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning, A. C. (2005). The McREL Rural Technology Initiative: Research And Evaluation Study. Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL). Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL).
Linton, J. N. (2017). Institutional Factors for Supporting Electronic Learning Communities. Online Learning, 21(1), 238–256.
Lock, J. V. (2006). A New Image: Online Communities to Facilitate Teacher Professional Development. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(4), 663–678.

25. References (3 of 4)
Matranga, A. V. (2017). Mathematics Teacher Professional Development as a Virtual Boundary Encounter. Drexel University.
McFarland, J., Hussar, B., Wang, X., Zhang, J., Wang, K., Rathbun, A., Barmer, A., Forrest Cataldi, E., and Bullock Mann, F. (2018). The Condition of Education 2018 (NCES ). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics
McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (2001). Professional communities and the work of high school teaching. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mintz, C. A. (2017, January 1). The Effects of Implementing an Online Professional Learning Community for Teachers of Gifted and Talented Courses: An Action Research Study.
Moir, E. (2009). Accelerating Teacher Effectiveness: Lessons Learned from Two Decades of New Teacher Induction. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(2), 14–21.
Moore, J. A., & Chae, B. (2007). Beginning teachers’ use of online resources and communities. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 16(2),
Reich, J., Levinson, M., & Johnston, W. (2011). Using Online Social Networks to Foster Preservice Teachers’ Membership in a Networked Community of Praxis. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE Journal), 11(4), 382–397.
Restivo, P. (2012, January 1). Teachers’ Participation in an Online Professional Learning Community and the Influence on Self-Efficacy and Instruction.
Sayre, S., & Wetterlund, K. (2002). Pyramid Power: A Train-the-Trainer Model to Increase Teacher Usage of the ArtsConnectEd On-Line Resource.
Schrum, L., Burbank, M. D., & Capps, R. (2007). Preparing Future Teachers for Diverse Schools in an Online Learning Community: Perceptions and Practice. Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 204–211.
Sciuto, D. J. (2017, January 1). Building Connective Capital and Personal Learning Networks through Online Professional Development Communities for New Teachers.
Scurr, A. C. G. (2017). Teacher Learning in Online Communities of Practice (Doctoral dissertation, Grand Canyon University).
Singer, N. R., & Zeni, J. (2004). Building Bridges: Creating an Online Conversation Community for Preservice Teachers. English Education, 37(1), 30–49.
Smith, S. U., Hayes, S., & Shea, P. (2017). A Critical Review of the Use of Wenger’s Community of Practice (CoP) Theoretical Framework in Online and Blended Learning Research, Online Learning, 21(1), 209–237.
Snider, S. A. (2009, January 1). A Critical Analysis of Rural Teachers’ Usage of Online Communities.

26. References (4 of 4)
Strycker, J. (2012). Developing an Online Support Community for Pre-Service Teachers at East Carolina University. TechTrends, 56(6), 22–26. Talbert, Joan E. (2010) Professional learning communities at the crossroads: How systems hinder or engender change. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan, & D. Hopkins (Eds.), The Second International Handbook of Educational Change (pp. 555–571). New York: Springer. Tsai, I.-C. (2011). Levels and Patterns of Participation and Social Interaction in an Online Learning Community for Learning to Teach. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 22(2), 191–239. Van den Akker. (1994). Designing innovation from an implementation perspective. In Husen, Torsten & Postlethwaite, T. Neville. (Eds.) The International Encyclopedia of Education. 2nd ed. Oxford, U.K.: Vavasseur, C. B., & MacGregor, S. K. (2008). Extending Content-Focused Professional Development through Online Communities of Practice. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(4), 517–536. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. From: Mind and Society (p ). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. West, E., Jones, P., & Semon, S. (2012). Promoting Community for Online Learners in Special Education. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(3), 108–116. Yates, S. S. (2014). The SMART Goal Framework: Teacher Perceptions of Professional Learning and Teacher Practice. Northcentral University.