This document discusses professional learning communities (PLCs) and provides an overview of two related projects - HeadsUp and TePinTeach. It begins with an agenda that includes defining PLCs, sharing experiences with cooperation in workfields, and discussing project activities and findings. Characteristics of effective PLCs are outlined, including collective learning, supportive conditions, shared values/vision, and shared practice. Research on teacher PLCs is summarized. The document then describes breakout sessions for participants to discuss cooperation in their own work and characteristics of PLCs. Impressions from a survey on student work groups are shared. The discussion section notes that PLCs can be an effective format for professionalization when established and further developed

1. Prof. Dr. Katja Kansteiner-Schänzlin Koedukation Folie 1
Professional Learning Communities
– HeadsUp project & TePinTeach project
Prof. Dr. Katja Kansteiner
University of Education Weingarten, Germany
Kirchplatz 2, 88250 Weingarten
kks@ph-weingarten.de

2. Agenda
Folie 2
1. The format of PLC with a few suggestions how
to differentiate
2. Breakout rooms to share experiences on how
learning is pursued in cooperation in ones own
workfield
3. Insight in the main activities and findings of the
two projects HeadsUp and TePinTeach
4. Discussion

3. 3
1. Verständnisrahmen von PLG
Range of the concept of Professional Learning Communities
„anything from decision making
committees to regular meeting
groups or collegial learning
teams” (Owens, 2014, S. 54)
„Königsweg“ (best way)
(Bonsen & Rolff, 2006, S.167)
Working definition (translated):
PLGs are based on the collaboration of several people "... in the attitude to
share responsibility for methodically cooperation in the service of learning for
the individual as well as the group, with a close reference to professional
practice and giving insights in the practical work. They are based on shared
values, norms and objectives in joint work with the option of setting individual
or joint priorities in quality development processes. And they are based on
personal responsibility for a goal-oriented professionalization process with a
change in professional practice. (Kansteiner, 2019, S. 12)

4. 4
• …
• Joint Evaluation, Data-Based
Decision Making
• Drawing on Research
(Mitchell & Sachney, 2000)
Range within the concept of PLCs – core characteristics
• …
• Search for Resources beyond
School (Bolam et al, 2005)
Hord, 1994:
• collective learning and the application of that learning
• supportive conditions for the maintenance of the learning community
• supportive and shared leadership
• shared values and vision
• shared practice

5. 5
1. Verständnisrahmen von PLGRange of the concept of Professional Learning CommunitiesRange within the concept of PLC – further characteristics
naturally grown – external intervention
joint topic – diverse topics
different - joint interests of development
each member‘s topic every session –
only one member‘s topic each session
(Bolam et al., 2005; Stoll et al. 2006; Wiliam, 2007; Feger & arruda, 2008; Owen, 2014; Warwas & Helm, 2018,
Kansteiner et al. 2019, Kansteiner et al. 2020)
fixed final end – open ended
with internal lead – with external lead
homogenious - heterogenious
exchange, reflect – visit, exchange
InitiationStructure
FocusProcedure
single group – whole staff
school head coordinating - particpating
Approach
students‘ learning – profession over all
Benefit
mutual help – learning organisation

6. 6
1. Verständnisrahmen von PLGResearch on PLCs of teachers
(vgl. z.B. Rosenholtz, 1989; Newman, 1994; Louis, Marks & Kruse, 1996; Curry, 2008; Gallimore, Ermeling &
Saunders, 2009; Horn & Little, 2010; Lomos et al., 2011; Hadar & Brody, 2012; Slavit, Nelsen & Deuel, 2013;
Tam, 2015; Warwas & Helm, 2018)
PLCs effective if…
Willingness to
change &
Commitment
Focus on
learning an
development
of students
Longterm
planning &
focused
structure
Reflection &
focus on
issues
Turn new
learning into
action
Multiple
learning
options
Support Leadership & Management
ExternalFacilitation

7. Break Out Sessions
Folie 7
1. Please share your experiences in groups on how learning is pursued in
cooperation in your workfields and in which characteristics it can be
described overall to disperse the status quo
2. You might use the overview on the characteristics and maybe by
reflecting you can suggest further perspectives for differentiation
3. Take about 15 minutes to exchange and give us a short report in the
plenum, please.

8. Our Projects: Perspectives on (good) Practice
Folie 8
• SL-PLCs in Germany, Norway, Austria, Sweden,
Spain, Cyprus
• Leadership development + School development in
different areas of diversity
consulting development + evaluation
www.plc-headsup.eu
German Strand of the Research:
Grounded Theory Methodology (Strauss & Corbin, 1996; Breuer et al., 2019)
• data material: interviews, observation logs, group discussions etc.
• Researchers: in charge of development and research
Research Team: Katja Kansteiner, Sabine Welther, Maria Rist, Christoph Stamann

9. Our Projects: Perspectives on Good Practice
Folie 9
Group
Meeting
Person
Group Composition
Working mode
Communitybuilding
Documentation
Consistent Framework
Action
Reflection
NewLearning

10. Our Projects: Perspectives on Good Practice
Folie 10
Group Composition
Working mode
Communitybuilding
Documentation
Consistent Framework
Action
Reflection
NewLearning
Group Composition
- Participation as
leadership team
- Same or different school
type
Community building
- Active process
- Aim: mutual trust
- Danger: show off
activities
Working mode
- Clarifying roles
- Negotiative work
- Investing in becoming
familiar with the
processes

11. Our Projects: Perspectives on Good Practice
Folie 11
Group Composition
Working mode
Communitybuilding
Documentation
Consistent Framework
Action
Reflection
NewLearning
Consistent Framework
- Fixed schedule
- Meet at least once a
month for at least 2h
New Learning
- members as experts,
school visits
- culture of challenging
each other (beyond
feedback)
- impulses for reflection -
“inquiry“
Documentation
- Agenda, minutes…
- Danger: hiding behind
formal aspects

12. Our Projects: Perspectives on Good Practice
Folie 12
Group Composition
Working mode
Communitybuilding
Documentation
Consistent Framework
Action
Reflection
NewLearning
Reflection and Action
- individual Learning Diary
(Reflection)
- Action Plan following the
questions
- What happened?
- Why did it happen?
- What can I learn?
- What´s the next step?

13. Conclusion
Folie 13
 PLC – much praised, increasingly findings on the impact associated
with quality demands (teacher PLCs)
 occasionally tested for the professionalization of school leaders 
encouraging results
 After initiation and given the concept externally, co-construction leads
to a shared understanding of what is going to happen in a PLC.
 Negotiation process on a common basic consensus of cooperation
design in the SL-PLC in the tension between community and
professionalism.

14. 14
1. Verständnisrahmen von PLG
Teachers PLC
(broad international discussion)
Range of the concept of Professional Learning CommunitiesPreparing for PLC work at University
Heads PLC
(e.g. Hirsh & Hord, 2008; Honig &
Rainey, 2014; Zepeda et al., 2015;
Davidson, Naffi & Raby, 2017)
Student PLC
??? PLC
??? PLC
??? PLC
 Usual method to work in cooperative formats in schools/universities
 Specific formats put under researched, e.g. Peer Coaching
 Competencies for team work and team development expected

15. 15
Students report:
• a lot of cooperation takes place
(voluntary / mandatory)
• often little appreciation for it
• more positive when self-chosen
groups
• frequent criticism that not all
students contribute actively,
• lack of competence on issues or
discipline
• some see little benefit for good
success in assessments and
exams
• nobody knows special
expectations of PLCs
Lectureres observe:
• start in a friendly way
• very different in level of
communication, discussion,
meeting discipline
• preparation for meetings varies in
depth
• quite a few tend to give advice or
add in self-report
• explanations roughly based on
scientific knowledge, hardly ever
further looking up in texts
• if task allows it, division of labor
Impressions of the survey
IO1 – Consolidated report on the needs of student-teacher professional learning and student-teacher professional learning communities
http://www.tepinteach.eu/deliverables/

16. 16
Impressions of the survey
Fields of Tension:
Activation in class effective use of time
Socializing Fairness among group
Building up competencies Voluntariness
Release of teachers more intensive support
Format for professionals beginning to professionalize
 TePinTeach devellops tools to raise the quality of communication and
interaction in students work groups and get a first experience of what PLC
could be like: http://www.tepinteach.eu/
 formative and summative evaluation based on questionnaires (open,
closed questions), analysis of document (e.g. tool papers), group
feedbacks on tried out tools  Evaluation Report

17. Discussion
Folie 17
2
3
1
 PLG is what the group makes out of it.
 A promising format for professionalization
of professionals
 empirically proofed
 further development after establishing
 In university studies, there is a lack of a
joint professionalism and joined
responsibility for a common practice
 becoming professional in cooperating is
the goal of a LC
?
https://www.malerische-
wohnideen.de/blog/treppenha
us-im-landhausstil-neu-
gestalten-mit-kalkputz-und-
designbelag.html

18. Folie 18
Literature
Ahlgrimm, F. (2010): „Für mich persönlich hat sich wahnsinnig viel geändert“ – Untersuchungen zur Kooperation in Schulen (Dissertation). Universität Erfurt, Deutschland.
Bolam, Ray/McMahon, Agnes/Stoll, Louise/Thomas, Sally/Wallace, Mike/Greenwood, Angela/Hawkey, Kate/Ingram, Malcolm/Atkinson, Adele/Smith, Michele (2005): Creating and Sustaining
Effective Professional Learning Communities. dera.ioe.ac.uk/5622/1/RR637.pdf (Abfrage: 27.07.2019).
Bonsen, Martin/Rolff, Hans-Günther (2006): Professionelle Lerngemeinschaften von Lehrerinnen und Lehrern. In: Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 52/2, S. 167-184.
Bradley, J., Munger, L. & Hord, S. (2015). Focus first on outcomes. JSD, 36(4), 44-47.
Buhren, Claus G. (2015): Personalentwicklung durch kollegiale Hospitation und Professionelle Lerngemeinschaften. In: Berkemeyer, Jana/Berkemeyer, Nils/Meetz, Frank (Hrsg.):
Professionalisierung und Schulleitungshandeln. Wege und Strategien der Personalentwicklung in Schulen. Weinheim und Basel: Beltz Juventa, S. 160–184.
Bush, T. (2010). Leadership Development. In T. Bush, L. Bells & D. Middlewood (Hrsg.). The Principles of Educational Leadership & Management (112-131). Los Angeles: Sage, 2. ed.
Curry, M. (2008). Critical Friends Groups: The possibilities and limitations embedded in teacher professional communities aimed at instructional improvement and school reform. Teacher's
College Record, 110(4), 733-74.
DeMatthews, David (2014): Principal and Teacher Collaboration: An Exploration of Distributed Leadership in Professional Learning Communities. In: International Journal of Educational
Leadership and Management 2/2, S. 176-206. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.447/ijelm.2014.16 (Abfrage: 27.07.2019).
DuFour, Richard/DuFour, Rebecca/Eaker, Robert/Many, Thomas (2010): Learning by Doing: A Handbook for Professional Learning Communities at Work (2nd ed.). Bloomington: Solution Tree.
DuFour, Richard (2004): What is a “Professional Learning Community”? In: Educational Leadership 61, H. 8, S. 6–11.
Feger, Stephanie/Arruda, Elise (2008): Professional learning communities: Key themes from the literature. https://www.brown.edu/academics/education-
alliance/sites/brown.edu.academics.education-alliance/files/publications/PBS_PLC_Lit_Review.pdf (Abfrage: 27.07.2019)
Fullan, M. (2014): The Principal. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fußangel, K. & Gräsel, C. (2014). Forschung zur Kooperation im Lehrberuf. In Terhart, E., Bennewitz, H. & Rothland, M. (Hrsg.), Handbuch der Forschung zum Lehrerberuf (846-864). Münster:
Waxmann.
Gallimore, R., Ermeling, B.A., Saunders, W.M., & Goldenberg, C. (2009). Moving the Learning of Teaching Closer to Practice: Teacher Education Implications of School-based Inquiry Teams.
Elementary School Journal 109 (5), 537-553.
Gallucci, Chrysan (2008): Districtwide Instructional Reform: Using Sociocultural Theory to Link Professional Learning to Organizational Support. In: American Journal of Education 114 (4), S.
541-581.
Gräsel, C., Fußangel, K. & Pröbstel, C. (2006). Lehrkräfte zur Kooperation anregen - eine Aufgabe für Sisyphos? Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 52(2), 205-219.
Hadar, L. & Brody, D. (2012). The Interaction Between Group Processes and Personal Professional Trajectories in a Professional Development Community for Teacher Educators. Journal of
Teacher Education 64(2), 145-161
Hord, Shirley (2004): Professional Learning Communities: Communities of Continuous Inquiry and Improvement. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
http://www.sedl.org/pubs/change34/plc-cha34.pdf (Abfrage: 27.07.2019).
Hord, Shirley (2009): Professional learning Communities. Educators Work Together Toward a Shared Purpose - Improved Student Learning.
http://www.earlychildhoodleadership.com.au/dloads/rsc/professional%20communities%20Hord2009.pdf (Abfrage: 27.07.2019).
Hord, S. (1997). Professional learning communities: Communities of continuous inquiry and improvement. Austin: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED410659 (Abfrage: 27.07.2019).
Hord, Shirley & Hirsch, Stephanie (2008): Making the Promise a Reality. In: Blankstein, Alan M.; Houston, Paul D.; Cole, Robert W. (2008): Sustaining professional learning communities.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press (Soul of educational leadership series, v. 3). Online verfügbar unter http://site.ebrary.com/lib/alltitles/docDetail.action?docID=10387918.
Horn, I., & Little, J. (2010). Attending to problems of practice: Routines and resources for professional learning in teachers' workplace interactions. American Educational Research, 47(1), 181-
217.

19. Folie 19
Huber, S. G. & Ahlgrimm, F. (Hrsg.) (2012): Kooperation: Aktuelle Forschung zur Kooperation in und zwischen Schulen sowie mit anderen Partnern. Münster.
Johnson, B. (2003). Teacher Collaboration: good for some, not so good for others. Educational Studies, 29(4), 337‐350.
Kansteiner, K. Stamann, C & Rist, M. (2019). Merkmale Professioneller Lerngemeinschaften – Analyse ihrer konzeptuellen Herkunft und Möglichkeiten ihrer Systematisierung. In Kansteiner, K.,
Stamann, C., Buhren, C. & Theurl, P. (Hrsg.), Professionelle Lerngemeinschaften als Entwicklungsinstrument im Bildungswesen. Weinheim: Juventa (im Erscheinen)
Kansteiner-Schänzlin, K. (2002). Personalführung in der Schule - Übereinstimmungen und Unterschiede zwischen Frauen und Männern in der Schulleitung. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
Keller-Schneider, M. & Albisser, S. (2012). Kooperation im Kollegium –eine Frage der Anerkennung? In J. Kosinar, S. Leineweger, H. Hegemann-Fonger & U. Carle (Hrsg.), Vielfalt und
Anerkennung: Nationale und Internationale Perspektiven auf die Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten von Grundschule und Kindergarten. Entwicklungslinien der Grundschulpädagogik, Bd. 10,
(130-142). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.
Kullmann, H. (2009). Lehrerkooperation an Gymnasien -‐ Eine explorative Untersuchung zu Ausprägung und Wirkungen am Beispiel des naturwissenschaftlichen Unterrichts. Dissertation,
Universität Duisburg-‐Essen.
Kullmann, H. (2013). Der Zusammenhang von Lehrerkooperation und Schulleistung – Zentrale Befunde und Perspektiven für die Forschung. In M. Massenkeil, J. & Rothland, M. (2016).
Kollegiale Kooperation im Lehrerberuf. Überblick und Systematisierung aktueller Forschung. Schulpädagogik heute, 7(13).
Kunz, Heim, D. , Arnold, C, Eschenmüller, M & Achermann, E. (2013). Einschätzung von Prozess und Output-Qualität durch Leitungspersonenvon neu gebildeten Unterrichtsteams. In M.
Keller-Schneider, S. Albisser & J. Wissinger (Hrsg.), Professionalität und Kooperation in Schule (138-151). Baltmannsweiler: Klinkhardt.
Kwakman, K. (2003). Factors affecting teachers‘ participation in professional learning activities. Teachers and Teacher Education, 19, 149‐170.
Kruse, Sharon/Louis, Karen/Bryk, Anthony (1995): Building Professional Community in Schools. https://www.learner.org/workshops/principals/materials/pdf/kruse.pdf (Abfrage: 29.07.2019)
Lave, Jean/Wenger, Etienne (1991). Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: University Press.
Lee, John Chi-kin/Zhang, Zhonghua/Yin, Hongbiao (2011): A multilevel analysis of the impact of a professional learning community, faculty trust in colleagues and collective efficacy on teacher
commitment to students. In: Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, S. 820-830.
Linder, R., Post, G. & Calabrese, K. (2012). Professional Learning Communities: Practices for Successful Implementation. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, Spring, 13-22
Lomos, Catalina/Hofman, Roelande H./Bosker, Roel J. (2011): Professional communities and student achievement-A meta-analysis. In: School Effectivness and School Improvement 22, H. 2,
S. 121-148.
Louis, Karen/, Kruse, Sharon/Bryk, Anthony (1995): Professionalism and community: what is it and why is it important in urban schools? In: Louis, Karen/Kruse, Sharon and Associates (Hrsg.):
Professionalism and Community: Perspectives on Reforming Urban Schools. Long Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Louis, Karen S./Kruse, Sharon D./Marks, Helen M. (1996): Schoolwide Professional Community. In: Newmann, Fred M. (Hrsg.): Authentic achievement. Restructuring schools for intellectual
quality. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, S. 179-203.
MacBeath, J. & Dempster, N. (Hrsg.)(2008). Connecting Leadership for Learning: Principles for Practice. Routledge: London.
Meirinck, J., Meijer, P. & Verloop, N. (2007). A closer look at teachers’ individual learning in collaborative settings. Teaching and Teaching Practice 13(2),
145-164.
Michell, C. & Sachney, L. (2000). Profound Improvement. Building capacity for a learning community. Lisse: Swetz & Zeitlinger Publishers.
Miller, Liz (2006): What are principals professional learning communities?
Moegling, K., Hadeler, S. 6 Hund-Göschel, G. (2016). Was sind gute Schulen? Eine Einführung zu einer schwer zu beantwortenden Frage. Schulpädagogik - heute, 7(13).
Newmann, F.M. (1994): School-wide Professional Community. In: Issues in Restructuring Schools, No. 6., S. 1-3.
Owen, Susanne (2014): Teacher professional learning communities: Going beyond contrived congeniality toward challenging debate and collegial learning for professional growth. In: Australian
Journal of Adult Learning, 54(2), 54-77.

20. Folie 20
Rolff, Hans-Günther (2013): Schulentwicklung kompakt. Modelle, Instrumente, Perspektiven. Weinheim und Basel: Beltz.
Rosenbusch, Heinz (2005): Organisationspädagogik in der Schule. Grundlagen pädagogischen Führungshandelns. Neuwied: Luchterhand.
Rosenholtz, Suzan J. (1989): Teachers´ workplace: the social organization of schools. Longman: New York.
Richter, D. & Pant, H. (2016). Lehrerkooperation in Deutschland. Eine Studie zu kooperativen Arbeitsbeziehungen bei Lehrkräften der Sekundarstufe I. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung,
Stuttgart: Robert Bosch Stiftung, Essen: Stiftung Mercator, Bonn: Deutsche Telekom Stiftung.
Rolff, H.G. (2013). Schulentwicklung kompakt. Modelle, Instrumente, Perspektiven. Weinheim: Beltz Verlag.
Rolff, H.G. (2015): Handbuch der Unterrichtsentwicklung. Weinheim: Beltz.
Rosenbusch, H. (2005). Organisationspädagogik der Schule: Grundlagen pädagogischen Führungshandelns. München: Luchterhand.
Rothland, M. (2007). Belastung und Beanspruchung im Lehrerberuf. Modelle, Befunde, Interventionen. Wiesbaden: VS.
Sharratt, L. & Planche, B. (2016), Leading Collaborative Learning. Empowering Excellence. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Slavit, D., Nelson, T. H., & Deuel, A. (2013). Teacher groups’ conceptions and uses of student-learning data. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(1), 8-21.
Soltau, A. & Mienert, M. (2009). Teamorientierung und Einstellungen zu Formen der Lehrerkooperation bei Lehrkräften. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht, 56, 213-223.
Senge, Peter/Cambron-McCabe, Nelda/Lucas, Timothy/Smith, Bryan/Dutton, Janis/Kleiner, Art (2012): A Fifth Discipline. Schools that learn. A Fifth Discipline Fieldbook for Educators, Parents,
and Everyone Who Cares About Education (first revised edition).
Stamann, Christoph/Theurl, Peter/Kansteiner, Katja/Louca, Loucas/Landstrom, Patrik (2019): Professionelle Lerngemeinschaften als Instrument der Schul- und Führungskräfteentwicklung –
Voraussetzungen, Chancen und Grenzen. In: Huber, Stephan (Hrsg.): Jahrbuch Schulleitung. Kronach/Köln: Carl Link Verlag, S. 199-215.
Stoll, Louise/Louis, Karen (Eds.) (2007): Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas. London/New York: Open University Press/McGraw Hill.
Stoll, Louise/Bolam, Ray/McMahon, Agnes/Wallace, Mike/Thomas, Sally (2006): Professional Learning Communities: A review of the literature. In: Journal of Educational Change, 7, 221-258.
doi: 10.1007/s10833-006-0001-8 (Abfrage: 20.05.2019)
Tam, A. C. F. (2015). The role of a professional learning community in teacher change: a perspective from beliefs and practices. Teachers and Teaching, 21(1), 22–43.
Terhart, Ewald (2011). Lehrerberuf und Professionalität. Gewandeltes Begriffsverständnis – neue Herausforderungen (S. 202-224). In: Helsper, Werner/Tippelt, Rudolph (Hrsg.): Pädagogische
Professionalität. Weinheim u.a.: Beltz.
Timperley, Helen/Wilson, Aaron/Barrar, Heather/Fung, Irene (2007): Teacher Professional Learning and Development: Best Evidence Synthesis Iteration. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of
Education. Online verfügbar unter: http://www.oecd.org/education/school/48727127.pdf (Abfrage: 13.06.2019).
Turner, J., Christensen, A., Kackar-Cam, H., Fulmer, S. & Trucano, M. (2018). The Development of Professional Learning Communities and Their Teacher Leaders: An Activity Systems
Analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 27(1), 49-88.
Vangrieken, K., Meredith, C., Packer & T., Kyndt, E. (2016). Teacher communities as a context for professional development: A systematic review. Teaching and Teacher Education 61, 47-59
Vescio, Vicki/Ross, Dorene/Adams, Alyson (2008): A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. In: Teaching and Teacher
Education 24, H. 1, S. 80–91.
Warwas, Julia/Helm, Christoph (2018): Professional learning communities among vocational school teachers: Profiles and relations with instructional quality. In: Teaching and Teacher
Education 73, pp. 43-55.
Wenger, Etienne; McDermott, Richard; Snyder, William M. (2002): Cultivating communities of practice. A guide to managing knowledge. [Nachdr.]. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School
Press
Wiliam, Dylan (2007): Changing Classroom Practice. Meeting regularly in teacher learning communities is one of the best ways for teachers to develop their skill in using formative assessment.
Educational Leadership (65)4, p. 36-42.
Wood, Diane (2007): Professional learning communities: Teachers, knowledge, and knowing. Theory Into Practice, 46(4), p. 281-290.
Zepeda, Christina et al. (2015): Direct Instruction of Metacognition Benefits Adolscent Science Learning, Transfer, and Motivation: An In Vivo Study. Journal of Educational Psychology. Vol. 107
No. 4.