Exploring Goal Structures in Teacher Professional Learning Communities

• In Event: Teacher Motivation for Learning and Professional Development

Abstract

Objectives
Professional learning communities (PLCs) are becoming increasingly prevalent as a format of teacher school-based professional development (e.g. Horn et al., 2017). While research has started to explore conditions that support productive interactions in PLCs (e.g. Horn & Kane, 2015; Levine & Marcus, 2010; Popp & Goldman, 2015), it seldom attends to the role teacher motivation plays in these settings. We seek to contribute to this growing body of research by proposing a motivational perspective: we assert that the goals the PLC emphasizes and adopts (i.e., its goal structures) can be central in shaping what teachers do together, how they interact with each other, and what they learn. In this study, we take initial steps towards conceptualizing and assessing goal structures in school-based PLCs, adopting a mixed-methods approach to explore teachers’ perceptions of the goal structures.
Theoretical framework
In this study, we draw on achievement goal theory (Ames & Archer, 1981; Urdan & Kaplan, 2020), but note a few fundamental differences between classroom settings and PLCs. First, while in the classroom, peers may play a role in constructing goal structures (Urdan, 2004), in school-based, peer-led PLCs, where relationships are less hierarchical, participants are expected to play a more central role. Second, by definition, the PLC model stresses several goals by expecting teachers to simultaneously work, learn, and develop a community (Hord, 2008). We therefore expect considerable variation in PLCs' goal structures.
Methods
Drawing on Butler (2012), we developed a questionnaire to assess teachers’ perceptions of their PLC goal structures. The questionnaire was designed to assess mastery, performance approach, performance avoidance, work avoidance, and relational goals (Table 9). 652 elementary and middle school Israeli teachers, participating in a program aimed to support PLCs, completed the survey. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 30 teachers, seeking thick descriptions of how they view their community’s goals and their manifestations.
Results
Exploratory factor analysis revealed four factors reflecting mastery goals, relational goals, performance approach goals, and avoidance goals (which incorporates both performance and work avoidance), all together accounting for 56.77% of the variance (Table 10). Even though it was previously suggested (e.g., Butler, 2007) the difficulty to distinguish between performance and work avoidance has been pointed out before and requires further exploration. Relational goals scored significantly higher (4.35) than mastery goals (4.16), performance approach goals (3.81), and avoidance goals (2.66). (Table 10).
Findings from the interviews show that overall, teachers’ descriptions of their community's goals corresponded with the theoretical constructs measured by the questionnaire. The findings suggest that variance in PLCs’ goal structures is a function of their varying organizational-institutional definitions (e.g., interviewees described “team meetings” as associated with work-avoidance goals, and “learning communities” - with learning goals disconnected from work).
Scientific significance
This study lays the groundwork for the conceptualization and assessment of PLC goal structures, calling for and affording further research into the association between PLC goals and teacher learning. It highlights the contextual nature of PLCs' perceived goal structures and how they are shaped by wider organizational contexts and roles.

Authors

• Miriam Babichenko, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

• Dana Vedder-Weiss, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

• Rinat Cohen, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

• Yariv Feniger, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev