This study explores the intricate dynamics of leadership, professional learning communities (PLCs), and their collective impact on driving teaching innovation. We analyze an original dataset from 352 schools from five Italian regions by combining two original datasets from a principals’ questionnaire and innovative didactic project information for each school. We use structural equation modeling to analyze factors influencing innovation. Our results reveal a significant and positive influence of both supportive and instructional leadership styles on the organizational capabilities of the PLC, indirectly affecting teaching innovation. Interestingly, while organizational capabilities exhibited a strong positive relationship with teaching innovation, personal and interpersonal capabilities do not show a significant relationship. This suggests that these aspects of PLC alone may not suffice in driving pedagogical innovation. Overall, this paper underlines the importance of effective leadership and robust PLCs in fostering an environment conducive to innovative teaching practices. It offers valuable insights for policymakers, educators, and school leaders aiming to cultivate a culture of pedagogical innovation in their institutions.
AdamsRBessantJPhelpsR (2006) Innovation management measurement: A review. International Journal of Management Reviews8(1): 21–47.
2.
AndersonNPotočnikKZhouJ (2014) Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management40(5): 1297–1333.
3.
Bitan-FriedlanderNDreyfusAMilgromZ (2004) Types of “teachers in training”: The reactions of primary school science teachers when confronted with the task of implementing an innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education20(6): 607–619.
4.
BlaseJBlaseJ (1999) Implementation of shared governance for instructional improvement: Principals’ perspectives. Journal of Educational Administration37(5): 476–500.
BossertSTDwyerDCRowanB, et al. (1982) The instructional management role of the principal. Educational Administration Quarterly18(3): 34–64.
7.
BowenNKGuoS (2011) Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Oxford University Press.
8.
BrykASchneiderB (2002) Trust in Schools: A Core Resource for Improvement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
9.
CaiYTangR (2022) School support for teacher innovation: The role of basic psychological need satisfaction. Thinking Skills and Creativity45: 1–17.
10.
CarpenterD (2015) School culture and leadership of professional learning communities. International Journal of Educational Management29(5): 682–694.
11.
CrowtherFFergusonMHannL (2009) Developing Teacher Leaders: How Teacher Leadership Enhances School Success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
12.
Darling-HammondL (1994) Professional Development Schools: Schools for Developing a Profession. 1234 Amsterdam Ave: Teachers College Press.
13.
de JongWLockhorstDde KleijnR, et al. (2022) Leadership practices in collaborative innovation: A study among Dutch school principals. Educational Management Administration & Leadership50(6): 928–944.
14.
DiraniKBaldaufJMedina-CetinaZ, et al. (2021) Learning organization as a framework for networks’ learning and collaboration. The Learning Organization28(4): 428–443.
15.
EttlieJEBridgesWPO’KeefeRD (1984) Organization strategy and structural differences for radical versus incremental innovation. Management Science30(6): 682–695.
16.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1): 39.
17.
GilesCHargreavesA (2006) The sustainability of innovative schools as learning organizations and professional learning communities during standardized reform. Educational Administration Quarterly42(1): 124–156.
HallingerPGümüşSBellibaşMŞ (2020) Are principals instructional leaders yet?’ A science map of the knowledge base on instructional leadership, 1940–2018. Scientometrics122(3): 1629–1650.
20.
HarrisA (2008) Distributed leadership: According to the evidence. Journal of Educational Administration46(2): 172–188.
21.
HeckRHHallingerP (2014) Modeling the longitudinal effects of school leadership on teaching and learning. Journal of Educational AdministrationProfessor Tobias Feldhoff PFR and DEK (ed.)52(5): 653–681.
22.
HidalgoAD’AlvanoL (2014) Service innovation: Inward and outward related activities and cooperation mode. Journal of Business Research67(5): 698–703.
23.
HordSM (1997) Professional Learning Communities: Communities of Continuous Inquiry and Improvement. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, 211 East Seventh Street, Austin, TX 787601. Available at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED410659 (accessed 1 December 2021).
24.
HuLBentlerPM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal6(1): 1–55.
25.
HulpiaHDevosGVan KeerH (2009) The influence of distributed leadership on Teachers’ organizational commitment: A multilevel approach. The Journal of Educational Research103(1): 40–52.
26.
IsmailM (2005) Creative climate and learning organization factors: Their contribution towards innovation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal26(8): 639–654.
27.
JuBLeeYParkS, et al. (2021) A meta-analytic review of the relationship between learning organization and organizational performance and employee attitudes: Using the dimensions of learning organization questionnaire. Human Resource Development Review20(2): 207–251.
28.
KennedyADeuelANelsonTH, et al. (2011) Requiring collaboration or distributing leadership?Phi Delta Kappan92(8): 20–24.
29.
KennyDAKaniskanBMcCoachDB (2015) The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research44(3): 486–507.
30.
KlineRB (2016) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
31.
KontoghiorghesCAwbreSMFeurigPL (2005) Examining the relationship between learning organization characteristics and change adaptation, innovation, and organizational performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly16(2): 185–212.
32.
LeanaCRPilFK (2006) Social capital and organizational performance: Evidence from urban public schools. Organization Science17(3): 353–366.
33.
LeithwoodKJantziD (2000) The effects of transformational leadership on organizational conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of Educational Administration38(2): 112–129.
34.
LeithwoodKLouisKSAndersonS, et al. (2004) How Leadership Influences Student Learning. Review of Research. The Wallace Foundation.
35.
LeithwoodKHarrisAHopkinsD (2008) Seven strong claims about successful school leadership. School Leadership & Management28(1): 27–42.
36.
LeithwoodKPattenSJantziD (2010) Testing a conception of how school leadership influences student learning. Educational Administration Quarterly46(5): 671–706.
LouisKSRobinsonVM (2012) External mandates and instructional leadership: School leaders as mediating agents. Journal of Educational Administration50(5): 629–665.
39.
McCharenBSongJMartensJ (2011) School innovation: The mutual impacts of organizational learning and creativity. Educational Management Administration & Leadership39(6): 676–694.
40.
MorrisJELummisGWLockG, et al. (2020) The role of leadership in establishing a positive staff culture in a secondary school. Educational Management Administration & Leadership48(5): 802–820.
41.
NemeržitskiSLoogmaKHeinlaE, et al. (2013) Constructing model of teachers’ innovative behaviour in school environment. Teachers and Teaching19(4): 398–418.
42.
OrphanosSOrrMT (2014) Learning leadership matters: The influence of innovative school leadership preparation on teachers’ experiences and outcomes. Educational Management Administration & Leadership42(5): 680–700.
43.
OwenS (2016) Professional learning communities: Building skills, reinvigorating the passion, and nurturing teacher wellbeing and “flourishing” within significantly innovative schooling contexts. Educational Review68(4): 403–419.
44.
PalettaAAlimehmetiGMazzettiG, et al. (2021) Educational leadership and innovative teaching practices: A polynomial regression and response surface analysis. International Journal of Educational Management35(4): 897–908.
45.
Paniagua A and Istance D (2018) Teachers as Designers of Learning Environments: The Importance of Innovative Pedagogies. Paris: OECD Publishing.
46.
PetersonADumontHLafuenteM, et al. (2018) Understanding Innovative Pedagogies: Key Themes to analyse New Approaches to Teaching and Learning. OECD Publishing.
SchusslerDLPooleIRWhitlockTW, et al. (2007) Layers and links: Learning to juggle ‘one more thing’ in the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education23(5): 572–585.
49.
SengePM (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of The Learning Organization. Revised and updated edition. New York: Doubleday.
50.
SerdyukovP (2017) Innovation in education: What works, what doesn’t, and what to do about it?Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning10(1): 4–33.
51.
SimoninBL (1997) The importance of collaborative know-how: An empirical test of the learning organization. Academy of Management Journal40(5): 1150–1174.
52.
SleegersPden BrokPVerbiestE, et al. (2013) Toward conceptual clarity: A multidimensional, multilevel model of professional learning communities in Dutch elementary schools. The Elementary School Journal114(1): 118–137.
53.
SongJHKimHMKolbJA (2009) The effect of learning organization culture on the relationship between interpersonal trust and organizational commitment. Human Resource Development Quarterly20(2): 147–167.
54.
SpillaneJP (2012) Distributed Leadership. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
55.
StollLKoolsM (2017) The school as a learning organisation: A review revisiting and extending a timely concept. Journal of Professional Capital and Community2(1): 2–17.
56.
StollLMcMahonAThomasS (2006) Identifying and leading effective professional learning communities. Journal of School Leadership16(5): 611–623.
57.
StollLBolamRMcMahonA, et al. (2006) Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change7(4): 221–258.
58.
ThompsonSCGreggLNiskaJM (2004) Professional learning communities, leadership, and student learning. RMLE Online28(1): 1–15.
59.
ThurlingsMEversATVermeulenM (2015) Toward a model of explaining Teachers’ innovative behavior: A literature review. Review of Educational Research85(3): 430–471.
60.
TiddJ (2001) Innovation management in context: Environment, organization and performance. International Journal of Management Reviews3(3): 169–183.
61.
van UdenJMRitzenHPietersJM (2014) Engaging students: The role of teacher beliefs and interpersonal teacher behavior in fostering student engagement in vocational education. Teaching and Teacher Education37: 21–32. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0742051X13001352
62.
VerloopNVan DrielJMeijerP (2001) Teacher knowledge and the knowledge base of teaching. International Journal of Educational Research35(5): 441–461.
63.
VescioVRossDAdamsA (2008) A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education24(1): 80–91.
ZhengXYinHLiZ (2019) Exploring the relationships among instructional leadership, professional learning communities and teacher self-efficacy in China. Educational Management Administration & Leadership47(6): 843–859.
