Exploring the Mediating Effect of Team Trust on Creative School as Input to

Professional Learning Opportunities

Lyll Caren S. Guanlao
[email protected]
Teacher III
Dayap Elementary School
Calauan, Laguna Philippines

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).

1.1 Statement of the Problem

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 the relationships of elementary
school teachers in Calauan Sub-Office in the Division of Laguna. Specifically, it sought answers to the
following research questions posed in the study:
1. How do the teacher-respondents perceive the level of implementation of creative school practice in
terms of:
1.1 New Insights in Training;
1.2 Flexible Administrative Structure;
1.3 Adequate Physical Space; and
1.4 Context of Creative Leadership?

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?

4. What is the level of professional learning communities as to:

4.1 Supportive and Shared Leadership;
4.2 Shared Values and Vision;
4.3 Collective Learning and Application;
4.4 Shared Personal Practice; and
4.5 Supportive Conditions-Relationships?

5. Is there a significant relationship between creative school and the:

5.1 Professional Learning Communities; and
5.2 Team Trust?

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.

3. Results and Discussion

Table 1. Summary of Level of Practice in Implementing Creative School

Indicators Mean SD Interpretation

New Insights in Training 4.42 0.65 Highly Practiced
Flexible Administrative Structure 4.34 0.52 Highly Practiced
Adequate Physical Space 3.61 0.87 Highly Practiced
Context of Creative Leadership 4.28 0.61 Highly Practiced
Overall 4.16 0.50 Highly Practiced
Legend: 5.00 – 4.50 Very Highly Practiced / VHP; 4.49 - 3.50 Highly Practiced / HP; 3.49-2.50 Moderately Practiced / MP; 2.49 – 1.50 Slightly
Practiced / SP; 1.49-1.00 Not at all Practiced / NP

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. Summary of the Level of Observing on Cognitive-Based Trust

Indicators Mean SD Interpretation

Ability 4.45 0.77 Highly Trusted
Predictability 4.42 0.49 Highly Trusted
Overall 4.44 0.55 Highly Trusted
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 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

Indicators Mean SD Interpretation

Benevolence 4.68 0.41 Very Highly Trusted
Integrity 4.47 0.57 Very Highly Trusted
Overall 4.59 0.44 Very Highly Trusted

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.

Table 4. Summary of the Level of Observing on Team Trust

Indicators Mean SD Interpretation
Cognitive-Based Trust 4.44 0.55 Highly Trusted
Affective-Based Trust 4.59 0.44 Very Highly Trusted
Overall 4.51 0.45 Very Highly Trusted

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 5. Summary of Perceived Level in Professional Learning Communities

Indicators Mean SD Interpretation

Supportive and Shared Leadership 4.40 0.47 Highly Practiced
Shared Values and Vision 4.48 0.46 Highly Practiced
Collective Learning and Application 4.53 0.45 Very Highly Practiced
Shared Personal Practice 4.45 0.52 Highly Practiced
Supportive Conditions-Relationships 4.52 0.46 Very Highly Practiced
Overall 4.47 0.42 Highly Practiced
 Legend: 5.00 – 4.50 Very Highly Practiced / VHP; 4.49 - 3.50 Highly Practiced / HP; 3.49-2.50 Moderately Practiced / MP; 2.49 – 1.50 Slightly
Practiced / SP; 1.49-1.00 Not at all Practiced / NP

As revealed in Table 5, the summary of levels in Professional Learning Communities is

exhibited. In professional learning communities, teachers are often Highly Practiced, as evidenced by the
average mean of 4.47 (SD = 0.42). Notably, shared and supportive leadership had the lowest mean score
of 4.40 (SD = 0.47). This emphasizes how important it is for principals to collaborate and facilitate
teachers' participation in leadership and decision-making. Fostering a culture of cooperation, Trust, and
shared accountability within PLCs is a critical function of effective leadership, eventually improving
teacher empowerment and professional growth.
Moreover, it is significant that the category with the highest mean score—collective learning and
application—was 4.53 (SD= 0.45) as Very Highly Practiced. This emphasizes how crucial it is for
teachers at all levels to participate in processes that collaboratively seek out new information among staff
members and use that knowledge to meet students’ needs. This feature is essential to successful PLCs
because it encourages ongoing learning, creativity, and enhancement of instructional strategies to benefit
students.
The findings highlight the success and effectiveness of PLCs in fostering collaborative learning
environments and promoting teacher engagement in professional development activities that directly
impact student learning outcomes.
Table 6. Correlation Between Creative Schools and Professional Learning Communities

Professional Learning Communities

Creative Schools Shared Shared Supportive
Supportive and Collective Learning
Values and Personal Conditions- Overall
Shared Leadership and Application
Vision Practice Relationships
1. New Insights in
.348** .351** .417** .324** .361** .404**
Training
2. Flexible
Administrative .690** .577** .545** .593** .505** .655**
Structure
3. Adequate Physical
.444** .362** .272** .333** .295** .384**
Space
4. Context of Creative
.701** .467** .411** .460** .433** .556**
Leadership
Overall .704** .567** .524** .548** .512** .642**
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Coefficients:.81-1.0 Very strong

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. Correlation Between Creative School and Team Trust

 Team Trust
Creative Schools
Cognitive-Based Trust Affective-Based Trust Team Trust
1. New Insights in Training .638** .230** .508**
2. Flexible Administrative Structure .577** .575** .641**
3. Adequate Physical Space .381** .223** .345**
4. Context of Creative Leadership .618** .606** .681**
Overall Creative School .715** .509** .693**
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

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.

Table 9. Regression of Creative School on Team Trust

Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 1.316 0.158 8.31 .000
Adequate Physical Space -0.299 0.037 -0.586 -8.126 .000
Context of Creative Leadership 0.149 0.048 0.204 3.084 .002
Flexible Administrative Structure -0.136 0.067 -0.16 -2.036 .043
R =.788 R Square=.620 Adjusted R Square=.615 F (4, 271)=110.745 p =.000

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.

Table 10. Regression on Team Trust Affecting Professional Learning Communities

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

R =.690 R Square=.475 Adjusted R Square=.470 F (3, 272)=82.194 p =.000

Table 10 reveals the F (3, 272)=82.194 and p =.000. Hence, it signifies the rejection of the null
hypothesis. This implies that the distribution of leadership among school personnel promotes cooperative
decision-making. Teachers have similar aspirations for the school's advancement and student
achievement. To enhance their teaching methods, they apply the training programs to manage complex
situations in which their students have various needs. The size of the classroom equipment, including
desks, is based on the age of the students, and they use their physical space to improve instructional
tactics. They have opportunities for teachers to observe colleagues and provide support, which fosters
cooperation and professional development.
Specifically, flexible administrative structure has a significant correlation with professional
learning communities. It implies the effect of flexible administrative structure on the professional
learning communities is shown by the regression (β =.358, p <.000), which means that 35.8% explains
the effect. It indicates an inclusive and caring school climate where teachers feel respected, motivated,
and inspired to work together and create, fostered by a flexible administrative structure. In PLCs, teachers
are more likely to actively participate, exchange insights, look for solutions, and practice efficient
teaching strategies that improve student learning results. School leaders, teachers, and staff can develop a
sense of ownership, responsibility, and accountability for school development initiatives through
collaboration and shared decision-making. Various viewpoints, group problem-solving, and cooperative
projects to enhance instructional strategies, student involvement, and general school performance are
advantageous to PLCs. Flexible administrative structures and PLCs work together to foster an innovative,
professional development and continuous improvement culture in the school community. Teachers
participate in reflective practices, data-driven decision-making, continuous professional development,
and cooperative learning opportunities.
Additionally, school leaders are essential in creating a flexible administrative structure that
promotes inclusive practices, cooperative decision-making, and an innovative and trusting school culture.
To foster a collaborative and inclusive school culture, it is important to ask teachers and staff for
feedback, promote open communication, and supply resources and support for these efforts.
The new insights in training significantly correlate to the professional learning communities, as
shown by the regression (β =.137, p <.000), meaning that 13.7% explains the effect. This suggests
implementing new training insights into PLCs improves a collaborative learning environment
characterized by innovation, Trust, respect, and a shared commitment to every student's academic
achievement. The benefits of a supportive learning environment for students include collaborative
learning, reflective practices, and efficient modification of teaching approaches to match the requirements
of diverse pupils. School leaders are crucial in fostering and enabling unique training programs within an
inventive school leadership framework. In addition to actively engaging in brand-new PLC activities and
training courses, teachers also share best practices, welcome criticism, foster a culture of continuous
 improvement, provide resources for introducing novel teaching techniques, acknowledge and celebrate
PLC successes, and promote and support opportunities for professional growth.
Furthermore, the context of creative leadership significantly correlates with professional learning
communities. It implies the effect of the context of creative leadership on the professional learning
communities is shown by the regression (β =.125 p <.000), which means that 12.5% explains the effect. It
suggests that a school leader's leadership style involves funding programs for leadership development
that improve the leaders' capacity for empathy, communicating, making decisions, and fostering a
pleasant school climate. Give school administrators the guidance, mentoring, and resources to cultivate
emotional intelligence, resilience, and successful leadership techniques that foster cooperation and
creativity inside PLCs. To create a continuous improvement culture and foster Trust, school leaders and
teachers should support collaborative practices, open communication, and shared decision-making
procedures. PLCs should encourage regular meetings, feedback sessions, collaborative planning, and
reflective practices to foster teacher collaboration, professional development, and student success.
Encourage a culture shift in PLCs that prioritizes risk-taking, creativity, innovation, and ongoing
learning. This shift should be backed by strong leadership and cooperative methods. Foster a supportive
school environment, acknowledge and celebrate accomplishments, offer resources for creativity, and
promote trial and error and shared accountability for school development initiatives.
In conclusion, a flexible administrative structure, new insights into training, and the context of
creative leadership in creative schools have significant positive relationships with professional learning
communities (r=.690). This suggests that professional learning communities increase by 47.5 % as the
flexible administrative structure, new insights in training and context of creative leadership increase.

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

Effect SE t p LLCI ULCI

Direct 0.2729 0.0495 5.6517 0.0000 0.1822 0.3771
Indirect 0.2650 0.0547 0.1569 0.3703
Total 0.5447 0.0393 13.8639 0.0000 0.4672 0.6220
CS → TT 0.6207 0.0390 15.9287 0.0000 0.5429 0.6974
TT → PLC 0.4270 0.0552 7.7227 0.0000 0.3181 0.5358
CS → TT → PLC 0.3124 0.0606 0.1906 0.4277
Table 12 shows a significant positive relationship between creative school and team Trust (B=
0.6207, p=.001). This implies that incorporating creative school practices into the classroom encourages
greater Trust among team members. Investing in creative school practices helps develop team trust and
encourages innovation. Establishing an atmosphere that fosters innovative teaching and learning methods
should be a top priority for school leaders, as this builds teacher confidence. Building Trust in the team
on both an affective and cognitive level can result in stronger and more productive professional learning
communities. Teachers taking part in and encouraging innovative teaching methods will probably
increase team members' Trust in one another. Enhanced Trust can lead to better teaching methods, more
productive teamwork, and better student results. Teachers can create a more cohesive and encouraging
professional community by emphasizing Trust's cognitive and dynamic aspects.
The final analysis showed that team trust (0.4270, p=.001) and creative school (27.29, p=.001)
significantly impacted the practice of professional learning communities. The results suggest that team
trust mediates the link between creative school and professional learning communities (ab= 26.50). This
suggests that team trust plays a role in transmitting the effects of creative school practices on professional
learning communities.
Creative school and team Trust account for 51.77% of the variance in professional learning
communities. This large proportion suggests that these two variables are important predictors of their
success.
Partial mediation was practiced since both creative school and team Trust were significant in the
final regression analysis. By recognizing the partial mediation effect, the results highlight how important
creative school practices and team trust levels are to the success of productive professional learning
communities. Schools must focus on developing creative and trustworthy conditions to enhance their
professional learning communities. Using both strategies, professional learning communities may
become stronger and more productive, ultimately improving student results and school growth.
Recommendations
Based on the study's findings, several recommendations are offered to enhance the effectiveness
of supervisory management and the occupational competence of elementary school teachers. Firstly,
teachers should actively engage in conversations with school administrators, local government agencies,
and community leaders to emphasize the value of upgrading physical infrastructure. Secondly, to boost
team trust while raising student achievement and school community morale and ensuring everyone knows
what is expected of them, the principal should set SMART goals—specific, measurable, achievable,
results-oriented, and time-bound.
Furthermore, principals can improve the effectiveness and inclusivity of their leadership through
the implementation of structured feedback systems, collaborative platforms, transparent communication,
trust-building initiatives, and integrating feedback into professional development. Schools can increase
the efficacy of PLCs by implementing flexible learning spaces, designating specific areas for
collaboration, utilizing technology, and encouraging a shared space culture. Lastly, enhancing Affective-
Based Trust through adequate physical space involves creating environments that support school
personnel's well-being, collaboration, and professional growth.

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.