This document summarizes a research study on teacher-led professional learning communities (PLCs) called Master Teacher Studios (MTSs) in China. It provides background on MTSs and outlines the study's rationale, research questions, theoretical framework, methods, findings, and conclusions. The key points are: - MTSs are cross-school PLCs in China led by master teachers to support teacher learning and development. Little research has examined their practices. - The study aims to understand teacher leadership and collective learning in MTSs. It examines how MTSs developed and function, and the roles of teacher leaders. - Findings indicate MTSs have progressed through developmental stages since 2001

1. Teacher-led Teacher Learning in Cross-school Professional learning
communities (PLCs): Practices of Master Teacher Studios in China
The Department of Education Policy and Leadership, EPL
The Education University of Hong Kong, EdUHK, China
ZHANG Meng

2. Content
I. Rationale of the Study
II. Research Questions
III. Theoretic Framework
IV. Research Methods
V. Research Findings
VI. Implication and Conclusion

3. Practical rationale
• Teacher learning has drawn worldwide attention. Yet, effective teacher learning requires many
conditions (e.g. Hargreaves & Fullan, 2015; Jensen et al., 2016).
• Among these conditions, master teachers are taken as crucial manpower to support peer
learning (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017).
• Teacher-led teacher learning then has been concerned. MTSs in China also has been
implemented since 2001 at national wide which is little known by outsiders.
Research rationale
• MTSs, cross-school teacher learning communities in China, share features of PLCs which few
concerned by researchers (Zheng, 2016).
• Yet, how teacher leaders impact teacher collective learning in cross-school teacher learning
communities is not clear yet.
• Thus, this study aims to reveal the veil of MTSs in China.
Rationale of the study
I

4. II
To understand teacher-led teacher learning in MTSs, four
specific sub-questions are developed:
• How do MTSs develop in China?
• What do MTSs look like?
• How do teachers in the studio learn together?
• How do teacher leaders enact their leadership roles in the MTS?
Research Questions

5. III Theoretical Framework
About teacher leadership About effective teacher learning
Many studies have discussed teacher leadership behaviors (e.g.
York-Barr & Duke, 2004; Katzemeger & Moller, 2009; Muijs &
Harris, 2007; Wenner & Campbell, 2017). Two types of teacher
leadership behaviors are identified.
• To enhance instruction, i.e. promoting teacher professional
learning and improving student learning, teacher leaders may
engage in collective professional learning, taking action
research, sharing experiences and ideas with other peers,
interact with peers, and frost collaborative culture and
relations to support instruction.
• To promote organizational improvement and change, teacher
leaders manage regulatory affairs, building shared visions,
increasing organization capacities, and collaborate with
broader school communities.
To maintain the high-quality practice, it has become
imperative for teachers to engage in continuing
professional learning (e.g., Grosemans et al., 2015;
Hargreaves, 2003; Feiman-Nemser, 2012; Timperley,
2011).
The literature synthesized some features of effective
teacher learning. Three main features of effective teacher
learning are elaborated in this study:
• effective teacher learning is embodied in instructional
practice;
• effective teacher learning involves critical reflection;
• effective teacher learning often takes the form of peer
collaboration.

6. IV Research Methods
1. Selecting research site & case
• We selected Zhejiang as a research site
because it is economically and
educationally well-developed in China.
• We further selected 8 MTSs focusing on the
junior middle school stage. These studios
are varied in subjects and levels.
2. Selecting research participants
• Purposive and snowball sampling strategies.
• 8 hosts and 1-3 members in each studio.
3. Data collection
• Semi-structured interviews: two interview were developed
and adopted to interview each participant individually.
• Documents: government policies, website resumes,
publications of hosts, working diary of members, and
development plan of MTSs et al..
• Observation: we observed some typical teacher learning
activities such as public lessons, lectures, and group
seminars or workshops.
4. Data analysis
• The data were analyzed through a vertical
way and then comparative horizontal way.

7. V Research Findings
For RQ1: How do MTSs develop in China?
Major development phases of MTSs in China
mainly consists of 3 stages:
• Before 2001: Embryonic stage;
• 2001-2010: Flourishing in East China; and
• 2010-2020: National implementation stage.
For RQ2: What do MTSs look like?
The process of building an MTS is usually comprised of these four steps:
• Local education bureaus release the notice;
• Master teachers apply to be or be nominated as hosts of MTSs;
• Teachers from different schools apply to join one MTS; and
• Local education bureaus officially approve and authorize the MTSs.

8. V Research Findings
For RQ3: How do teachers in the studio learn together?
There are mainly five domains of teachers learning activities
adopted in MTSs.
• Giving, observing, and reviewing public lessons in a collective way;
• Participating in practice-oriented research lead by hosts of MTSs;
• Attending lectures shared by the host and other experts;
• Reading journals, books, and magazines; and
• Experience exchange.
For RQ4: How do teacher leaders enact their leadership in the MTS?
Seven key leadership roles and behaviors of the hosts are concluded as below.
• Vision crafter;
• Teaching-research activity design;
• Teacher development platform provider;
• Co-learner;
• Role model; and
• Harmonious relationship builder.

9. Conclusion
• The article provides contextually specific understandings of
innovative teacher-led peer learning practices in China.
• By doing so, it offers insights for other systems that may be
interested in adopting similar programs. Furthermore, it also
enriches the knowledge base of teacher leadership and cross-
school teacher professional learning.
• Although teacher leadership for teacher learning across schools is
receiving increasing interest internationally research in the area
remains relatively scarce.
• More in-depth empirical studies are needed to explore, for
example, how teacher leadership influences interschool peer
teachers’ professional learning in-depth, how the enactment of this
• leadership differs from in-school teacher leadership and how it is
structured and exercised across different contexts.
Implication & Conclusion
VI
Implication
• Institutional support is crucial to the formation of new
system mechanisms.
• Respect for teachers’ professional autonomy is key to
making full use of master teachers’ expertise to lead peer
learning across schools.
• System-embedded teaching-research activities and job-
embedded teacher learning approaches provide the
foundation for teachers and enable their learning by doing
continuously.
• The mentoring-mentee relationship and peer collaboration
across schools create harmonious relationships and positive
learning cultures.

10. CAMPBELL, C., LIEBERMAN, A. & YASHKINA, A. (2015) Teachers leading educational improvements: Developing teachers' leadership, improving practices, and
collaborating to share knowledge, Leading and managing, 21(2), pp. 90-105.
DARLING-HAMMOND, L., HYLER, M. E., GARDNER, M., & ESPINOZA, D. (2017). Effective Teacher Professional Development. CA: Learning Policy Institute.
DAY, C., & SACHS, J. (2004). Professionalism, performativity and empowerment: Discourses in the politics, policies and purposes of continuing professional development.
International Handbook on the Continuing Professional Development of Teachers (pp. 3-32). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
FAIRMAN, J. C. & MACKENZIE, S. V. (2015) How teacher leaders influence others and understand their leadership, International Journal of Leadership in Education, 18(1), pp.
61-87.
FULLAN, M., & HARGREAVES, A. (2016). Bringing the profession back in: Call to action. pp. 1-28. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED571784.
GOSS, P. & SONNEMANN, J. (2020) Top teachers: sharing expertise to improve teaching. Retrieved on 1st October 2020, from: < https://grattan.edu.au/report/top-teachers/>
HARGREAVES, A. (2003) Teaching in the knowledge society: Education in the age of insecurity (New York, US: Teachers College Press).
HARRIS, A., JONES, M. & HUFFMAN, J. B. (2017) Teachers leading educational reform: The power of professional learning communities (London, UK: Routledge).
HOFSTEDE, G. (2001) Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (London, UK: Sage).
HORD, S. M. (1997). Professional learning communities: Communities of continuous inquiry and improvement. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED410659.
KATZENMEYER, M. & MOLLER, G. (2009) Awakening the sleeping giant: Helping teachers develop as leaders (Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press).
LEITHWOOD, K. & D. JANTZI (2000). The effects of different sources of leadership on student engagement in school (London, UK: Routledge).
NGUYEN, D., HARRIS, A. & NG, D. (2019) A review of the empirical research on teacher leadership (2003–2017), Journal of Educational Administration, 58(1), pp. 60-80.
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), pp. 1-33.
STOLL, L., BROWN, C., SPENCE-THOMAS, K. & TAYLOR, C. (2015) Perspectives on teacher leadership for evidence-informed improvement in England, Leading and
Managing, 21(2), pp. 76-91.
WENNER, J. A. & CAMPBELL, T. (2017) The theoretical and empirical basis of teacher leadership: A review of the literature, Review of Educational Research, 87(1), pp. 134-
171.
YORK-BARR, J. & DUKE, K. (2004) What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship, Review of Educational Research, 74(3), pp. 255-316.
Reference

11. Any comments are welcome.