Guanlao and Callo (2024) - For-Publication
Guanlao and Callo (2024) - For-Publication
Guanlao and Callo (2024) - For-Publication
Eden C. Callo
Orcid: 0000-0002-9457-9361/ [email protected]
Vice President for Academic Affairs
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Abstract
The study aimed to determine the effect of team trust on the practice of creative school in
professional learning communities and the significance of team trust in their relationships.
Respondents included 276 elementary teachers from 13 elementary schools in Calauan Sub-
Office, Schools Division of Laguna. The study used a descriptive correlational design to see if
the level of team trust among school personnel mediates the effect of creative school on the
practice of professional learning communities. The data was gathered using a validated survey
questionnaire. The data were analyzed using frequency, mean, standard deviation, Pearson-
product-moment correlation and multiple regression. The study findings were summarized as
teachers perceived a high practice in implementing creative school and practice of professional
learning communities. The level of observing team trust is highly trusted. The correlation test
between creative school and team Trust indicates a significant, strong, positive relationship.
Team trust and creative school significantly impacted the practice of professional learning
communities. The results suggest that team trust mediates the link between creative school and
professional learning communities. Creative school and team trust account for the variance in
professional learning communities. The study recommends that public teachers work hard to
upgrade their physical facilities, such as ICT classrooms, school libraries, high-quality sports
facilities, and physical equipment, with principals, local government agencies, and community
leaders to help student learning outcomes greatly.
Keywords: creative school, team trust and professional learning communities
1. Introduction
The world is changing dramatically and quickly, impacting the educational system, including
how schools evolve and who runs them. Education aims to help students develop the various facets of
their personalities rather than impart knowledge and facts (Abunasser, 2012).
A creative school is necessary to accommodate the rapid development of the time. This requires
creative human resources, which various internal and external circumstances can influence (Rachmawati
et al., 2020).
Trust influences almost every type of social relationship. It influences people's decisions
regarding whether and how they will engage with others. On the other hand, Trust also affects how entire
countries behave toward one another. Therefore, it is essential to comprehend the elements that affect the
choice of Trust to engage in the entire range of social interactions (Hancock et al., 2023).
When teachers and the administration collaborate to support teachers' professional development
and provide learning opportunities, professional learning communities demonstrate how the school is
improving (DuFour, 2010).
Professional learning communities bring together organized groups of teachers to discuss
methods and ideas for enhancing their teaching practices (Indeed Editorial Team, 2022).
Moreover, the impacts of leadership on teacher professional development are mediated by
teachers' Trust in the school principal and their work. The impacts of leadership on teacher professional
development are mediated by teacher work and trust in the school principal (Bektas et al., 2022).
In this regard, Trust within a team is essential. How principals can foster Trust by paying
attention to the correlates of Trust that mediate student learning, teacher's success, and teacher
professionalism, as well as the role that faculty trust in the principal plays in student learning (Tschannen-
Moran & Gareis, 2015).
2. What is the level of team trust on cognitive-based Trust as perceived by the respondents as to:
2.1 Ability; and
2.2 Predictability?
3. What is the level of team trust on affective-based Trust as perceived by the respondents as to:
3.1. Benevolence; and
3.2 Integrity?
6. Is there a significant relationship between team trust and professional learning communities?
7. Is the level of team trust significantly mediating the relationship between creative schools and professional
learning communities?
2. Methodology
The study applied a descriptive and correlational approach to determine (a) the relationship
between the characteristics of creative school and professional learning communities of teachers and (b)
the mediating effect of team trust among them. As outlined by McCombes (2022), descriptive research
aims to describe and observe the key features of the results without modifying them while providing
precise and reliable descriptions of the sample and measurements. The study employed a random
sampling technique to choose the required respondents. It used the samples of two hundred and seventy-
six (276) elementary school teachers from a total population of thirteen (13) selected elementary school
teachers in 22 schools of Cauan Sub-Office, Schools Division of Laguna. Demographic Profile: Included
respondents' age, gender, civil status, highest educational attainment, designation, and length of teaching
experience. Creative School: Assessed through sub-variables including new insights in training, flexible
administrative structure, adequate physical space and context of creative leadership, based on the
Creative School Model by Ebneroumi and Rishehri's (2011) and Four C Model of Creativity (2009).
Team Trust: Evaluated cognitive and affective team trust through sub-variables inspired by Mayer's
Tripod Model (1995). Professional Learning Communities: Measured using supportive and shared
leadership, shared values and vision, collective learning and application, shared personal practice and
supportive conditions-relationships drawing from Hord and Sommers (2008) and Combes's Approach.
The adviser and panel members' assistance relevant to the questionnaire's contents was solicited
for internal and external validation. The researcher had an online pilot testing the instrument, choosing
thirty (30) teachers from Alaminos Central Elementary School-Alaminos Sub-Office as a free test. After
a week, the same test or questionnaire was given to check the test question's validity. The test result was
given to the statistician to validate the result. The final form of the questionnaire was reproduced and
administered to respective Respondents. The researcher secured permission from the Schools
Superintendent in the Division of Laguna through the Public Schools District Supervisors. The
respondents were objectively selected through sample sampling. The questionnaires were distributed
among the school head and teacher respondents. Completed questionnaires were collected for data
analysis. Statistical analyses were calculated to summarize the responses, including perceptions of
creative school, professional learning communities and team trust, which were answered using mean and
standard deviation. Pearson R Correlation was used to determine the correlation between the independent
variables and dependent variables, testing its significance at 0.01 and 0.05 levels of significance. R 2 was
used to gauge how effectively a set of predictor variables accounts for a certain response variable. A
series of regression analyses were used to measure the impact of the creative school on the professional
learning communities, the impact of the creative school on the professional learning communities through
team trust, and the impact of the creative school on the professional learning communities included as a
predictor.
Table 1 provides an overview of the level of practice in implementing creative school indicators'
mean scores, standard deviations (SD), and interpretations. Each interpretation shows “Highly Practiced,”
with an overall mean score of 4.16 and SD= 0.50.
Velasco et al. (2015) support this study by stating that learning is an interactive procedure in a
designated setting, such as a creative school. Education aims to establish a teaching and learning
environment that will result in the required changes in students. These goals will only be achieved if
school facilities are sufficient, usable, and available (Reyes, 2013).
Table 2 indicates that respondents generally rated Usually Observed or Highly Trusted regarding
the ability and predictability of cognitive-based Trust. This observation is reflected in the resulting
general mean score of 4.44 (SD = 0.55).
Additionally, it shows that school personnel usually observed their colleagues are more capable
of carrying out their duties than they are in consistently adhering to the school's standards of behavior, as
indicated by the higher mean score for Ability cognitive-based trust 4.45 (SD = 0.77) compared to the
mean score of Predictability cognitive-based trust 4.42 (SD = 0.49). Ability shows how strongly
respondents think their colleagues have the abilities and know-how to carry out duties in their particular
fields successfully. Based on their experience and skill, they show a high degree of confidence in the
ability of school personnel to produce high-quality work.
Furthermore, a slightly lower mean score of Predictability cognitive-based trust indicates that
although colleagues' abilities are trusted, there might be some variation in how consistently they adhere to
behavioral standards.
Table 3. Summary of the Level of Observing on Affective-Based Trust
Legend: 5.00 – 4.50 Always Observed / AO or Very Highly Trusted; 4.49 - 3.50 Usually Observed / UO or Highly Trusted; 3.49-2.50 Sometimes
Observed / SO or Sometimes Trusted; 2.49 – 1.50 Occasionally Observed/ OO or Somehow Trusted; 1.49-1.00 Never Observed / NO or Never
Trusted
Table 3 reveals that school personnel generally have a rating of “AO” or Very Highly Trusted
regarding the benevolence and integrity of affective-based Trust. This observation is reflected in the
resulting general mean score of 4.59 (SD = 0.44).
Additionally, benevolence got a higher mean score of 4.68 (SD=0.41). This indicates that
respondents always observed their colleagues demonstrate a high level of kindness, positivity, and
emotional support, leading to strong feelings of Trust and connection. It also reflects the importance of
interpersonal dynamics, empathy, and positive interactions in building Trust among school personnel.
Furthermore, the slightly lower mean score of 4.47 (SD = 0.57) suggests that while integrity is
valued, it is usually observed among the school personnel in shaping these trust perceptions.
Legend: 5.00 – 4.50 Always Observed / AO or Very Highly Trusted; 4.49 - 3.50 Usually Observed / UO or Highly Trusted; 3.49-2.50 Sometimes
Observed / SO or Sometimes Trusted; 2.49 – 1.50 Occasionally Observed/ OO or Somehow Trusted; 1.49-1.00 Never Observed / NO or Never Trusted
Table 4 summarizes the level of Observation on team trust. The data indicates that team trust is
generally highly perceived by respondents, as evidenced by the mean score of 4.51 (SD = 0.45), which
indicates that team trust is "Always Observed" (AO) or Highly Trusted.
Furthermore, the mean score for affective-based Trust was higher at 4.59 (SD = 0.44) than for
cognitive-based trust at 4.44 (SD = 0.55). This suggests that in contrast to cognitive-based Trust, which is
based on ability (school personnel's knowledge, competence, and abilities) and predictability (school
personnel meets the school's standards for reliability and uniformity in behavior), affective-based Trust in
school personnel places a strong emphasis on benevolence (level of courtesy and positive attitude) and
integrity (honesty, loyalty, fairness, integrity, and discretion). This implies that the emotional and
optimistic attitude of team trust more significantly shapes the trust dynamics in the school.
Table 6 shows a significant positive relationship between creative school and professional
learning communities (r=.642, p <0.01). The significant positive relationship between creative schools
and professional learning communities signifies a synergistic partnership that enhances the educational
experience. When educators collaborate, innovate, and engage in continuous learning within a supportive
environment, they are better equipped to meet the diverse needs of students and promote academic
excellence.
Specifically, the flexible administrative structure has the highest correlation and significant
strong positive relationship (r =.655, p <0.01) with professional learning communities regarding
supportive and shared leadership, shared values and vision, collective learning and collection, shared
personal practice and supportive conditions-relationships. It implies that the flexible administrative
structure contributes significantly to establishing and succeeding professional learning communities
within schools. Flexible administrative structures support the development of collaborative leadership
within PLCs. School personnel can effectively lead PLCs toward common goals by adapting
administrative practices to encourage shared decision-making, open communication, and collaborative
problem-solving, fostering a culture of Trust, cooperation, and shared responsibility among members.
On the other hand, it also demonstrates a significant moderate positive relationship between
adequate physical space (r=. 384, p <0.01) and professional learning communities. This implies that
professional learning community (PLC) development and success are related to the availability of enough
physical space within schools.
Table 7 reveals the context of creative leadership has the highest correlation (r=.681, p <0.01)
with team trust. This suggests that the context of creative leadership and team trust has a strong positive
relationship, which highlights the critical role of leadership philosophies in creating an atmosphere that
supports Trust. The development of cognitive and affective-based Trust among school personnel is
greatly aided by creative leadership, which fosters innovation, cooperation, and a common vision for
educational improvement. This improves team dynamics and overall effectiveness within schools.
Cognitive-based trust is often perceived as less risky compared to Affective-Based Trust, which
involves benevolence and integrity. In task-oriented environments, Trust based on ability and
predictability may be seen as more predictable and less susceptible to emotional fluctuations or
interpersonal dynamics. Educational settings often prioritize task completion, professional competencies,
and performance metrics. In such environments, Trust is frequently built upon objective criteria related to
competence, reliability, and the ability to deliver results, aligning more closely with Cognitive-Based
Trust. Performance evaluations and assessments within schools typically focus on measurable outcomes,
academic achievements, and job-related competencies. These evaluations reinforce Trust based on
cognitive dimensions, as individuals are assessed and recognized for their professional capabilities and
reliability in fulfilling their roles. Clarity in roles, responsibilities, and expectations contributes
significantly to the development of Cognitive-Based Trust. When individuals understand their
responsibilities and the criteria for success, trust naturally forms around their ability to perform tasks
competently and reliably.
It also shows team trust has a moderate positive correlation (r= .345, p < 0.01) to adequate
physical space. This suggests that while adequate physical space is moderately practiced, it positively
impacts team trust within schools.
The analysis revealed that cognitive-based Trust has a significant moderate positive relationship
with adequate physical space (r=.381, p <0.01) and a significant weak positive relationship between
affective-based Trust and adequate physical space (r=.223, p <0.01).
It also reveals that Cognitive-Based Trust, characterized by levels of ability and predictability
among school personnel, has a significant moderate positive relationship (r=.381, p <0.01) with adequate
physical space. This implies that when school personnel perceive each other as competent and reliable
and have confidence in each other's abilities to collaborate and complete tasks on schedule, adequate
physical space further enhances their Trust in the team.
On the other hand, Affective-Based Trust, rooted in benevolence and integrity among school
personnel, shows a significant but weak positive relationship (r=.223, p <0.01) with adequate physical
space. This suggests that while physical space does play a role in fostering emotional connections and
perceptions of sincerity and integrity within the team, its impact is comparatively weaker than its
influence on cognitive aspects of Trust.
Furthermore, a significant positive relationship exists between creative school and team Trust
(r=.693, p <0.01). This substantial correlation underscores the intrinsic connection between the creative
school of educational institutions and the trust dynamics within their teams. Creative schools,
characterized by their innovative approaches to teaching and learning, flexible administrative structures,
emphasis on new insights in training, flexible administrative structure, adequate physical space and
context of creative leadership, are found to be closely intertwined with the level of Trust among their
teams. The positive relationship between creative school and team Trust signifies that an environment
fostering creativity cultivates a strong sense of Trust among school personnel. This Trust is multifaceted,
encompassing cognitive-based Trust built on perceptions of ability and predictability and affective-based
Trust rooted in feelings of security, connection, sincerity, and integrity.
Table 8. Correlation Between Team Trust and Professional Learning Communities
Professional Learning Communities
Supportive Shared Collective Shared Supportive
Team Trust
and Shared Values Learning and Personal Conditions-
Leadership and Vision Application Practice Relationships
1. Cognitive-Based Trust .688** .563 **
.516 **
.446** .473**
2. Affective-Based Trust .675** .571** .517** .481** .531**
Overall Team Trust .759** .629** .574** .513** .554**
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 8 reveals that cognitive-based Trust has the highest correlation (r=.688**, p <0.01) with
supportive and shared leadership. This shows that teachers' and staff members' trust in one other's
competence and dependability is increased when school administrators participate in collaborative
decision-making and offer steady support. It also shows that while cognitive-based trust and shared
personal practice have a strong positive correlation, this relationship is not as strong as it is when it
comes to other practices of professional learning communities.
In addition, affective-based Trust has the highest correlation (r=.675**, p <0.01) with supportive
and shared leadership. This positive connection suggests a large increase in affective-based trust among
school staff as supportive and shared leadership practices grow inside a school. School leaders can foster
affective-based Trust, defined by a sense of security and solid interpersonal relationships, by including
staff members in decision-making, offering continuous support, and exhibiting authentic concern and
respect.
This suggests that supportive and collaborative leadership is essential to building team trust in a
school. The highest positive correlation (r=.759**, p <0.01) with supportive and shared leadership
indicates that team members' Trust is greatly increased when leaders practice shared and supportive
leadership. This is probably because these leadership behaviors encourage openness, diversity, and
respect for one another—all necessary for creating a strong sense of Trust among team members.
However, although shared personal practice—where teachers work together and exchange ideas
about how to teach—also fosters team trust, its influence is comparatively less pronounced, as evidenced
by the lower correlation (r=.513**,p <0.01) with shared personal practice. This implies that mutual
practice is crucial for developing teamwork and Trust.
Using the simple regression analysis, Table 9 shows the F (4, 271)=110.745 and p =.000.
Hence, it signifies the rejection of the null hypothesis. The R2=.620 implies that the practice of creative
school affects 62.00 % of the respondents’ variance in the level of team trust.
The context of creative leadership has a significant positive relationship with team trust (β =.149,
p <.002). This suggests that team trust increases by .149 as the context of creative leadership increases.
Team trust increases as creative leadership context is practiced more frequently. Creative leadership
fosters a culture of openness, understanding, empathy, and collaboration that tremendously impacts team
trust. The acts and behaviors of creative leaders improve performance, communication, and teamwork by
fostering a sense of Trust among team members. Trust between team members facilitates a positive
school culture that is defined by respect for one another, cooperation, and shared ownership of tasks and
goals. Teachers and other staff members are inspired, driven, and empowered to share ideas, offer
criticism, and cooperate to accomplish shared goals. Invest in leadership development programs that
improve a leader's capacity for decision-making, empathy, communication, and building team trust. Give
leaders the tools they need to become emotionally intelligent communicators, skilled conflict mediators,
and collaborative leaders through training, coaching, and support. Encourage school personnel to
collaborate, communicate, and share ideas by creating regular meetings, open channels of
communication, and feedback systems. To foster openness and Trust, allow team members to voice their
opinions, submit suggestions, and participate in decision-making. To strengthen a culture of gratitude,
support, and acknowledgment, acknowledge and value team members' contributions, efforts, and
accomplishments. Celebrate victories, credit individual and group efforts, and encourage an inclusive,
grateful, and positive school climate.
Furthermore, adequate physical space has a significant negative relationship with team trust (β
=-.299, p <.000). With the increase in team trust, there is a corresponding decrease in the adequate
physical space of .299.
School personnel are more likely to work together and engage more when there is less physical
distance between them. Close collaboration creates a sense of camaraderie and mutual support among
teachers in professional learning communities, where they collaborate to develop creative school
practices and share expertise. Teachers develop mutual trust in each other's skills and perspectives during
cooperative problem-solving and experimenting in a common area.
On the other hand, larger schools may see a more divided social network as cliques or groups
emerge around common values, passions, or allegiances. Rumors can be employed to strengthen group
identities or acquire power in these social circles, escalating tensions and eroding confidence among
teachers. Communication can become more difficult in a big physical environment because of physical
obstacles, noise, and distractions. These challenges can impede efficient communication and teamwork,
making it challenging for school personnel to build rapport and function cohesively. It can be challenging
for school leaders to build Trust and a sense of community among staff in a large space. Effective
leadership can only establish a culture of openness, transparency, and respect for one another. Still, these
efforts may be upset if team members face physical barriers to communication and teamwork.
Likewise, the flexible administrative structure has a significant negative relationship with team
trust (β =-.136, p <.043). Teachers in schools may begin to lose Trust in one another if they believe they
must handle everything independently. When they always feel they are on their own, it may be a
symptom that their colleagues are not supporting them. This impression can cause them to feel alone and
frustrated, eroding their Trust in their coworkers' capacity to help or work well together.
However, when they feel unmotivated to work on tasks alone, teachers frequently turn to their
colleagues for assistance or collaboration. This may include delegating tasks or requesting assistance to
do them. A teacher demonstrates their Trust in their colleagues' abilities to contribute to the task at hand
when they rely on them in this way.
Researchers Fairman et al. (2015) state that a teacher's leadership role aims to collaborate with
colleagues to enhance instruction and student understanding. Collaboration and multidisciplinary
teamwork are common places for creativity to surface. Team members are urged to work together across
departments, grade levels, and disciplines in a creative school setting. They can produce original ideas by
combining their viewpoints and areas of expertise. Relationships, Trust, and collaboration are crucial for
teachers' leadership development and school improvement. This collaborative culture encourages Trust
as team members rely on one another's talents and contributions to accomplish collective success.
Unstandardized Standardized
Model Coefficients Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 1.572 0.19 8.256 .000
1
Team Trust 0.644 0.042 0.679 15.316 .000
Table 10 shows the effect of team trust on the practice of professional learning communities
shown by the regression coefficient (β coefficient =.644, p<.000), which means that 64.4 % of the
respondents’ variance to the practice of professional learning communities is explained by team trust. At
the same time, the rest is not included in the study. There is a significant relationship between team trust
and professional learning communities.
This clearly shows when team trust is high, teachers feel motivated and energized to collaborate,
share ideas, and support each other's professional development. Teachers are more willing to participate
in PLCs, knowing their contributions are valued and can rely on their colleagues' support. Cognitive-
based Trust, through ability and predictability, ensures that teachers believe in their colleagues'
competence and reliability. This belief fosters a collaborative environment where educators feel confident
in working together. Teachers engage in joint planning and problem-solving, trusting that their colleagues
will contribute effectively and consistently. Affective-based Trust, through benevolence and integrity,
creates a supportive and ethical environment. Teachers who feel cared for and treated fairly are likelier to
invest in collaborative efforts. Teachers support each other in implementing new teaching strategies and
addressing challenges, knowing they will be met with kindness and fairness.
Additionally, team trust enhances the effectiveness of PLCs by fostering a positive, collaborative
culture. School leaders promote both cognitive and affective aspects of Trust within the school.
Encourage professional development and provide opportunities for teachers to build relationships and
collaborate.
Further, in the study of Zheng et al. (2016), trust in colleagues is the confidence and assurance
that individuals have in the skills, dependability, and intentions of colleagues. It is the foundation of
productive collaboration and teamwork in any professional environment. Colleagues' Trust also mitigated
the impact of leadership practices on professional learning communities in one another.
Table 11. Regression of Professional Learning Communities on Creative School
Unstandardized Standardized
t Sig.
Coefficients Coefficients
Model
Std.
B Beta
Error
(Constant) 1.782 0.176 10.143 .000
Flexible Administrative Structure 0.358 0.057 0.444 6.239 .000
3
New Insights in Training 0.137 0.031 0.209 4.412 .000
Context of Creative Leadership 0.125 0.047 0.18 2.669 .008
Table 12. The Mediating Effect of Team Trust on Creative School and Professional Learning
Communities/ Team Trust Mediates the Effect of Creative School to Professional Learning
Communities
References:
Abunasser, F. (2012). Introduction to educational management: Theories and skills. Amman, Jordan: Dar
AlMaseerah.
Barrett, P., Davies, F., Zhang, Y., & Barrett, L. (2015). The impact of classroom design on pupils'
learning: Final results of a holistic, multi-level analysis. Building and Environment, pp. 89, 118–
133.
Barrett, P., Treves, A., Shmis, T., & Ambasz, D. (2019). The impact of school infrastructure on learning:
A synthesis of the evidence.
Bektaş, F., Kılınç, A. Ç., & Gümüş, S. (2022). The effects of distributed leadership on teacher
professional learning: mediating roles of teacher trust in principal and teacher motivation.
Educational studies, 48(5), 602-624.
Calefato, F., Lanubile, F., & Novielli, N. (2014, April). Investigating the effect of social media on trust
building in customer-supplier relationships. In International Conference on Enterprise
Information Systems (Vol. 2, pp. 635-642). SCITEPRESS.
DuFour, R., & Dufour, R. (2010). The role of professional learning communities in advancing 21st-
century skills. 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn, 77-95.
Ebneroumi, S., & Rishehri, A. P. (2011). Towards a conceptual framework for the characteristics of a
creative school. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2253-2258.
Farman, Z., Ayub, S., & Khan, M. S. (2021). A Study On The Identification Of Creative Teaching
Practices And Their Effect On Students Academic Achievement At University Level. Elementary
Education Online, 20(1), 4387-4387.
Hancock, P. A., Kessler, T. T., Kaplan, A. D., Stowers, K., Brill, J. C., Billings, D. R., ... & Szalma, J. L.
(2023). How and why humans trust: A meta-analysis and elaborated model. Frontiers in
Psychology, 14.
Hord, S. M., & Sommers, W. A. (Eds.). (2008). Leading professional learning communities: Voices from
research and practice. Corwin Press.
Indeed Editorial Team, (2022). What Are Professional Learning Communities? (With Examples)
Jeffrey, B., & Woods, P. (2003). The creative school: A framework for success, quality and effectiveness.
Routledge.
Rachmawati, S., & Santosa, A. B. (2020). Principal's Managerial Competence in Actualizing a Creative
School. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(8), 3406-3416.
Reyes, P. B. (2013). Implementation of a Proposed Model of a Constructivist Teaching-Learning
Process–A Step Towards an Outcome Based Education in Chemistry Laboratory Instruction.
Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research| Vol, 1(1).
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Gareis, C. R. (2015). Principals, Trust, and cultivating vibrant schools.
Societies, 5(2), 256-276.
Ucus, S., & Acar, I. H. (2019). Exploring the perceptions of student teachers about ‘creative school’in
early childhood education. Early Child Development and Care, 189(2), 191-206.
Ulla, M. B. (2018). In-service teachers’ training: The case of university teachers in Yangon, Myanmar.
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43(1), 66-77. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n1.4
Vangrieken, K., Meredith, C., Packer, T., & Kyndt, E. (2017). Teacher communities as a context for
professional development: A systematic review. Teaching and teacher education, 61, 47-59.
Velasco, A. G., Agena, E. M., Orence, A. C., Gonzales, A. A., Beldia, R. A., & Laguador, J. M. (2015).
Emotional elements on learning style preference of high and low performing junior marine
transportation students. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Academic Research, 3(1), 1-8.
Vygotsky, L., Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,1962
Wyse, Dominic & Ferrari, Anusca. (2014). Creativity and education: Comparing the national curricula of
the states of the European Union and the United Kingdom. British Educational Research Journal.
41.10.1002/berj.3135.
Yakovleva, N. O., & Yakovlev, E. V. (2014). Interactive teaching methods in contemporary higher
education. Pacific Science Review, 16(2), 75-80.
Yeung, A. S., Craven, R. G., & Kaur, G. (2014). Teachers’ self-concept and valuing of learning:
Relations with teaching approaches and beliefs about students. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher
Education, 42(3), 305-320.
Zheng, X., Yin, H., Liu, Y., & Ke, Z. (2016). Effects of leadership practices on professional learning
communities: The mediating role of trust in colleagues. Asia Pacific Education Review, 17, 521-
532.