Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) are widely recognized as critical vehicles for enhancing teacher professional development and school improvement. However, their implementation often remains superficial, failing to leverage the full potential of collaborative practices. This study addresses this gap by systematically modeling the complex interdependencies that sustain effective PLCs in Malaysian primary schools. Using a qualitatively driven mixed-methods design, the research unfolds in three phases: (1) thematic analysis of open-ended survey responses from 78 teachers to identify key factors influencing PLC effectiveness, (2) refinement and prioritization of these factors through a Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) with six educational experts to establish consensus, and (3) stakeholder engagement via Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) involving teachers, school leaders, and external experts to map the hierarchical relationships among the validated factors. The findings reveal 11 critical elements categorized into Drivers, Linkages, and Dependents, with Leadership Support and Collaborative Culture emerging as foundational enablers. Notably, stakeholder comparisons expose variations in conceptual hierarchies, underscoring the need for role-sensitive frameworks. This study advances current literature by integrating complexity and systems theory to illustrate how structural, cultural, and relational dynamics interact to drive sustainable PLC practices. This study highlights actionable pathways for leaders, policymakers, and educators to foster adaptive, context-sensitive professional learning environments. Future research should extend this multi-stakeholder modeling approach across diverse educational settings and explore longitudinal impacts on student outcomes. In conclusion, this triangulated approach provides a robust blueprint for aligning policy, leadership, and collaborative culture to achieve transformative and enduring educational reform.
Goh Kok Ming (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: