Journal of Teaching Innovation and Reform

Vol. 2 (2026)
Articles

The Impact of Collaborative Leadership and Teacher Development on Student-Centered Learning in Chinese Primary Schools: A Mixed-Methods Study

PDF
  • Yu Yinuo,
  • Wang Yun,
  • Khar Thoe Ng,
  • Wang Siran,
  • Kamolrat Intaratat
Yu Yinuo
INTI International University, Nilai, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
Wang Yun
INTI International University, Nilai, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
Khar Thoe Ng
INTI International University, Nilai, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
Wang Siran
Heilongjiang Nursing College, 209, Xuefu Road, Nangang District, Harbin City, Heilongjiang Province, 150086 China
Kamolrat Intaratat
Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University, Bangkok, Thailand

Published 2026-06-22

Keywords

  • Student-centred learning,
  • Collaborative leadership,
  • Teacher professional development,
  • Urban–rural disparity,
  • School,
  • Chinese primary education,
  • Mixed methods
    • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

The Impact of Collaborative Leadership and Teacher Development on Student-Centered Learning in Chinese Primary Schools: A Mixed-Methods Study. (2026). Journal of Teaching Innovation and Reform, 2, 90-104. https://doi.org/10.65638/2978-5634.2026.2.08

Abstract

For fair education as aimed for in UN SDG 4, bridging the urban and rural schooling gap is key. This study looks at how cooperative leadership affects teacher development and student-centered learning in primary schools in China, striving for more equality in education. It uses teacher professional development as the link and explores how student-centered learning is carried out differently in urban and rural areas.

The method applied in this paper is an explanatory sequential mixed-method design. The quantitative dataset was gathered from 60 teachers working in four primary schools, including two urban and two rural, utilizing validated survey tools and questionnaires of 60 students to understand the context. Semi-structured interviews conducted with 12 administrators and teachers provided qualitative data. Correlation, hierarchical multiple regression and bootstrap analysis (5000 resamples) performed on SPSS 28.0 were used in quantitative analysis while thematic analysis with NVivo helped analyzing qualitative data.

There was a significant association between collaborative leadership and SCL (Pearson's r = 0.604, p<0.001) as well as TPD (Pearson's r = 0.582, p<0.001). TPD partially mediated the relation between the predictor and outcome variables, explaining 42.5% of its total effect. Urban schools demonstrated significantly better performance compared to rural schools regarding all three variables studied, where the difference between urban and rural schools was most pronounced concerning TPD (d=1.13). Qualitative results indicated that academic pressure and traditional hierarchy hindered SCL development and professional growth in rural schools.

The current study provides an empirically based mediation model and proves the importance of improving the system of TPD and professional communities of schools in rural areas within China's education policies' framework.

PDF

References

  1. Nguyen TT, Tran LH. Student-centred learning in Southeast Asian contexts: Challenges and opportunities. Asia Pac J Educ. 2024; 44(1): 1-16.
  2. Li X, Chen Y. The Double Reduction policy and student-centred learning reform in Chinese primary schools. Chin Educ Soc. 2024; 57(1): 3-18.
  3. Xu M, Tang H. Hierarchical school governance and teacher autonomy in China: Barriers to student-centred pedagogy. Educ Manag Adm Leadersh. 2023; 51(5): 1023-41.
  4. Hallinger P, Liu S. Instructional leadership and student-centred learning in China: A systematic review. Sch Leadersh Manag. 2023; 43(3): 210-31.
  5. Wang L, Zhang Q. Teacher professional development and instructional quality in urban and rural Chinese schools: A comparative study. Chin Educ Soc. 2023; 56(4): 261-78.
  6. Dewey J. Experience and education. New York: Macmillan; 1938.
  7. Piaget J. Science of education and the psychology of the child. New York: Orion Press; 1970.
  8. Vygotsky LS. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press; 1978.
  9. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol. 2000; 55(1): 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
  10. Collie RJ, Martin AJ. Motivation, engagement, and student-centred learning: Self-determination theory perspectives. Educ Psychol Rev. 2023; 35(2): 58.
  11. Spillane JP. Distributed leadership. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass; 2006.
  12. Hallinger P, Murphy J. Assessing the instructional management behavior of principals. Elem Sch J. 1985; 86(2): 217-47. https://doi.org/10.1086/461445
  13. Qiumeng W, Liu Y, Jiang Z, et al. Collaborative leadership in industry-higher education partnerships: A review of theories and practices in workforce reskilling. Int J Learn Teach Educ Res. 2025; 24(10): 869-891. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.24.10.41
  14. Chen L, Liu H. Collaborative leadership and student-centred instruction in Chinese primary schools. Asia Pac Educ Rev. 2024; 25(1): 89-104.
  15. Kim J, Park S. Collaborative professional development and instructional innovation in East Asian schools. Teach Teach Educ. 2023; 128: 104097.
  16. Richter D, Richter E. Teacher professional development in the 21st century: A framework for knowledge, skills, and pedagogical beliefs. Prof Dev Educ. 2024; 50(2): 221-38.
  17. Ahmed R, Hassan M. Teacher professional development and student-centred learning outcomes in diverse educational contexts. Int J Educ Dev. 2023; 98: 102745.
  18. Pan Y. Symbolic professional learning communities in rural Chinese schools: Appearance versus substance. J Educ Change. 2023; 24(3): 389-410.
  19. Ma Y, Cartwright P. Left-behind children and educational inequality in rural China: Family environment, self-directed learning, and school support. Compare J Comp Int Educ. 2023; 53(5): 741-58.
  20. Zheng X, Li L, Li J. Urban-rural disparities in educational outcomes: The mediating role of teacher quality and school leadership. Front Educ China. 2023; 18(2): 178-201.
  21. Guskey TR. Determining the effectiveness of professional learning. In: Easley J, Tulowitzki P, editors. Educational governance for the 21st century. New York: Routledge; 2021. p. 123-45.
  22. Darling-Hammond L, Hyler ME, Gardner M. Effective teacher professional development. Palo Alto (CA): Learning Policy Institute; 2017. https://doi.org/10.54300/122.311
  23. Zhu X, Zhu Y. Distributed leadership and curriculum reform in Chinese primary schools: An empirical investigation. Curric J. 2022; 33(3): 412-30.
  24. Amzat IH, Don Y, Fauzee MSO, Hussin F, Raman A. Validation of the collaborative leadership scale for school principals. Int J Leadersh Educ. 2022; 25(4): 601-18.
  25. Karakose T, Yirci R, Papadakis S. Distributed leadership, teacher self-efficacy, and student-centred learning: A cross-national study. Int J Educ Manag. 2025; 39(1): 14-32.
  26. Liu S, Hallinger P. Principal instructional leadership, teacher self-efficacy, and teacher professional learning in China: Testing a mediated-effects model. Educ Adm Q. 2021; 57(4): 696-732.
  27. Chanda M, Mulenga IM, Kanyamuna V. Principal leadership styles and teacher professional development in rural schools: Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa. J Educ Adm. 2024; 62(1): 45-62.
  28. Hallinger P, Wang WC. Assessing instructional leadership with the principal instructional management rating scale. Dordrecht: Springer; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15533-3
  29. Weimer M. Learner-centred teaching: Five key changes to practice. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass; 2002.
  30. Tseng SS, Lien YJ, Chen PH. Measuring student-centred learning in primary and secondary classrooms: Scale development and validation. Asia Pac Educ Res. 2022; 31(4): 399-410.
  31. Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE Publications; 2018.
  32. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav Res Methods. 2008; 40(3): 879-91. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
  33. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006; 3(2): 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  34. Marni M, Abdullah KH, Yaakob MFMF, Fauzee MSO, Jamil SF, Al-Zu’bi MAA, et al. Why teacher job satisfaction matters: strengthening headteachers’ transformational leadership in sustainable development education. Fronteira. 2024; 13(3): 31-50. https://doi.org/10.21664/2238-8869.2024v13i3.p31-50
  35. Lee T.L., Ali A., Othman R., Aziz N.N.A., Parahakaran S., Magno R.M., Intaratat K., Ng K.T., Fukui M., Ng J.H., Ong E.T., Kumar R. Technology-enhanced agrofarm education for environmental sustainability as a transdisciplinary approach to learning outcomes in higher institutions: Cases and suggested research. Transdisciplinary Teaching and Technological Integration for Improved Learning: Case Studies and Practical Approaches. IGI Global. 2024. https://www.igi-global.com/gateway/chapter/353972