Relationship Between Primary School Principals’ Distributed Leadership and Teachers’ Professional Development: The Mediating Role of Professional Learning Community and Identity

Abstract

This study examined the relationships among principals’ distributed leadership, teachers’ professional development, and two proposed mediators: teachers’ professional learning community (PLC) and professional identity, in primary schools in Hebei Province, China. Survey data were collected from 32 primary schools, yielding 581 valid questionnaires. Structural equation modeling was used to test the hypothesized mediation model. The results showed that the professional learning community and professional identity of primary school teachers in Hebei Province fully mediated the relationship between principals’ distributed leadership and teachers’ professional development. Thus, principals’ distributed leadership operates via PLC and professional identity. Taken together, the findings are consistent with the view that PLC and professional identity may function as important pathways linking principals’ distributed leadership to teachers’ professional development.

Keywords

principal distributed leadership professional development professional learning community professional identity

Introduction

Teachers’ professional development is widely understood as a dynamic and ongoing process through which teachers continuously strengthen professional knowledge and skills, refine teaching practices, and respond to educational change. Its overarching purpose is often framed in terms of supporting students’ academic success, self-improvement, and development (He et al., 2024; Olatunde-Aiyedun & Ogunode, 2021). With the deepening of China’s new basic education curriculum reform, teachers’ professional development has increasingly been treated as a salient issue in basic education. Governments and education departments at multiple levels in China have recognized its importance and introduced policies and measures intended to support it. As a result, the professional development of primary school teachers in China has received growing attention.

School management is frequently regarded as an important contextual factor shaping teachers’ professional development, and principal leadership is often positioned as central to school improvement and teacher growth (He et al., 2024; Ozdogru et al., 2025). At the same time, ongoing educational reforms have made school leadership increasingly complex and demanding, and principals may find it difficult to meet contemporary expectations of school management on their own (Karakose, 2023). Because a single leader may not be able to address all issues within a school, distributed leadership—a model aligned with flatter organizational structures—has attracted substantial scholarly attention (Bufalino, 2025; Cao et al., 2025; Ozdogru et al., 2025). Smith et al. (2025) argue that distributed leadership emphasizes leadership functions that rotate or are shared among multiple school members. In this sense, it may create conditions for shared power and responsibility, provide structural support for teachers’ participation in leadership, expand opportunities for teachers to realize self-worth, and strengthen professional capacities (Cao et al., 2025; Hallinger et al., 2018).

Distributed leadership is often discussed as a way to mobilize collective expertise in schools, which has been linked with improved decision-making, innovation, individual development, and school improvement. To pursue these aims, it may involve strategies such as promoting a shared vision, clarifying roles, empowering stakeholders, and encouraging continuous learning (Nadeem, 2024). Importantly, distributed leadership is not typically understood as something that can be simply imposed or delegated; rather, it is described as emerging through a complex interplay of collaborative learning opportunities and dynamic professional relationships (Aubrey et al., 2013; Yang & Chang, 2024). In this context, a teacher professional learning community can be described as a collaborative learning organization in which teachers continuously, critically, and collectively share and reflect on educational practice (Harris & Jones, 2017). Research and practice in teacher professional development have also consistently emphasized the value of building professional learning communities (Koris & McKinnon, 2023). Relatedly, distributed leadership has been described as fostering supportive conditions and relationships by enabling influential teachers to contribute through their expertise and teaching and research capacities. Such conditions may cultivate a culture of collaborative learning and trust, while developing and sustaining a professional learning community (Hamzah & Jamil, 2019; Olmo-Extremera et al., 2024; Yang & Chang, 2024). Within a teacher professional learning community, shared leadership and responsibility among members may facilitate open dialogue and teacher effectiveness, strengthen emotional bonds, and provide opportunities for teachers to innovate, reflect, exchange ideas, and learn collaboratively, thereby supporting professional development (Olmo-Extremera et al., 2024). In addition, distributed leadership has been described as fostering relationships, trust, collaboration, and empowerment, thereby creating an environment conducive to shared power and responsibility and supporting cooperation among teachers. Within these relationships, teachers may reconstruct self-perceptions and professional roles, potentially strengthening professional identity, autonomy, and a sense of belonging (Anthony et al., 2019). A stronger sense of belonging and identification with professional status, ethics, and environment has been associated with greater internal motivation and capacity for professional development, which may encourage deeper exploration of professional development models (Segal, 2024).

From the perspective of distributed leadership theory, leadership is enacted through organizational practices and individual sense-making processes rather than being confined to formal leadership roles (Gronn, 2002; Spillane et al., 2004). In this study, teacher professional learning communities can be understood as a key practice arena in which distributed leadership is operationalized, as they provide structured contexts for interaction, shared decision-making, and collective inquiry (Elmore, 2000; Stoll et al., 2006). Through participation in such collaborative practices, leadership functions may be distributed across teachers and embedded in routine professional activities. In contrast, teachers’ professional identity can be conceptualized as an individual-level mechanism through which distributed leadership may exert influence. When leadership responsibilities and authority are shared, teachers may interpret these practices as recognition of their professional expertise, shaping agency, belonging, and professional self-concept (Day et al., 2006; Sachs, 2005). Together, these two mediators reflect distinct yet complementary pathways: professional learning communities capture the organizational enactment of distributed leadership, whereas professional identity reflects teachers’ internalization and interpretation of these leadership practices. Considering both pathways may therefore offer a more comprehensive understanding of how principals’ distributed leadership relates to teachers’ professional development. Accordingly, this study aims to explore the mediating roles of primary school teachers’ professional learning communities and professional identities in the relationship between teachers’ perceptions of principals’ distributed leadership and teachers’ professional development.

This study focuses on primary school teachers in Hebei Province, a central province in China’s primary and secondary education system. In 2023, Hebei Province had 11,313 regular primary schools and 405,702 full-time primary school teachers (Hebei Provincial Bureau of Statistics, 2025). The Hebei Provincial Government and the Department of Education have promulgated policy initiatives—such as the “14th Five-Year Plan for the Development of Education in Hebei Province” and the Action Plan for Building a Strong Education Hebei Education Department (2023–2027)—to support and promote the professional development of primary school teachers (Yang & Chang, 2024) from multiple perspectives. Nevertheless, despite substantial national and regional investment, challenges reportedly remain in the effectiveness of teacher training in primary and secondary schools in Hebei Province. Specifically, professional knowledge and skill structures may not fully meet the demands of the new curriculum reform; training course design may lack systematicity; training content may be misaligned; training methods may lack innovation; and the transfer of training outcomes may be limited. These issues may affect the quality of teachers’ professional development across the region. Therefore, this study takes primary school teachers in Hebei Province as its research subjects to examine the impact of teachers’ perceptions of principals’ distributed leadership on teachers’ professional development, and to test the mediating effects of teachers’ professional learning community and professional identity, with the broader aim of supporting the professional development of primary school teachers in Hebei Province.

Literature Review

Distributed Leadership and Teacher Professional Development

Spillane et al. (2004) characterize distributed leadership as collaborative decision-making enacted across multiple levels of a school organization. Within this perspective, leadership is not treated as a singular or static role grounded solely in formal authority. Rather, as organizational power is distributed, members may assume flexible leadership roles aligned with shared objectives and task demands. Leadership influence, in this view, is derived from extensive professional knowledge and strong professional skills (Ahmed et al., 2025). Accordingly, distributed leadership can be understood as the diffusion of leadership influence grounded in professional expertise, and it involves recognizing and supporting teachers who embody such competencies in leadership roles.

Prior research suggests that distributed leadership may contribute to the development of individuals who hold leadership responsibilities in schools (Galdames-Calderón, 2023). It has also been linked to the strengthening of both leadership and learning capacities by fostering conditions in which power and responsibility are shared (Olmo-Extremera et al., 2024). Through empowerment and collaborative sharing, distributed leadership may enhance organizational members’ leadership skills and expand opportunities for mutual learning, thereby supporting teachers’ professional knowledge and skill development (Hallinger et al., 2018). For example, Galdames-Calderón (2023) found that when principals implemented distributed leadership, teacher leaders received greater opportunities and support for professional development. In such contexts, teacher leaders served as mentors and role models, contributed to supportive and collaborative learning environments, coordinated and monitored colleagues’ work, and worked to establish and achieve goals aimed at improving teaching practices. Similarly, Amzat et al. (2022) argued that distributed leadership strengthens teacher support and empowerment in decision-making processes, which may increase teachers’ willingness to share professional knowledge and skills collaboratively and, in turn, advance professional development.

The Mediating Influence of Teacher Professional Learning Communities in the Correlation Between Distributed Leadership and Teacher Professional Development

Distributed leadership theory posits that leadership practices are shaped and developed within particular contexts through which leaders influence followers (Spillane et al., 2004). For principals’ delegated leadership authority to be enacted, interaction among members of both formal and informal groups within the school system is required. Through such interactions, leadership decisions can be taken up and implemented in ways intended to support teacher development and enhance school effectiveness (Elmore, 2000).

A teacher professional learning community is a professional organization characterized by shared concepts and collective beliefs. The establishment of a teacher professional learning community relies on the personal and professional relationships cultivated within the school, together with the formation of values and principles that guide action (Azorín et al., 2020; Yang & Chang, 2024). Moreover, distributed leadership, enacted through both formal and informal roles, is crucial in fostering these relationships and cultivating shared values (Galdames-Calderón, 2023). Distributed leadership influences the establishment and development of teacher professional learning communities through conducive organizational structures, shared values and visions, collaborative learning, and shared practices (Olmo-Extremera et al., 2024).

Learning communities provide educators with platforms for ongoing learning and professional growth. Based on expertise, interests, and personal needs, teachers in professional learning communities engage in continuous dialogue, sharing, and discussion of challenges encountered in teaching practice through regular gatherings and seminars, thereby supporting both individual and collective development (Shin & Joo, 2016). Joo (2020) reported that distributed leadership significantly influences teachers’ professional development through the mediating role of teachers’ professional learning communities. Using distributed leadership approaches, principals encourage teacher involvement in school governance, and a cooperative working environment and positive collective culture can foster the development of teachers’ professional learning communities (Yang & Chang, 2024). Teachers’ professional learning communities arise from teachers’ individual needs within an organization (Wenger, 1999). When teachers’ professional learning communities function as organizational working conditions, communities aimed at enhancing educational practices can directly influence teachers’ professional levels and essential instructional behaviors (Anthony et al., 2019; Joo, 2020; Yang & Chang, 2024). Accordingly, Hypothesis 1 posits that the professional learning community of primary school teachers mediates the relationship between principals’ distributed leadership and teachers’ professional development.

Teachers’ professional identities can be formed through professional relationships within collective learning processes (Colmer, 2017). Teachers’ work motivation, self-efficacy, professional commitment, and job satisfaction have been described as components of professional identity (Canrinus et al., 2012). Hulpia et al. (2011) argue that distributed leadership promotes the formation and development of teachers’ professional identity. Distributed leadership cultivates an environment in which power and responsibility are shared, fostering a harmonious and respectful atmosphere while empowering influential teachers within the team through professional knowledge, teaching, and research skills (Yang & Chang, 2024). Such recognition is expected to strengthen teachers’ sense of efficacy (Joo, 2020). When teachers feel respected, they may experience a stronger sense of duty to contribute to the school, and their dedication to work may increase. In addition, distributed leadership establishes supportive conditions and relationships that nurture a culture of collaborative learning and trust (Yang & Chang, 2024). It may encourage open dialogue among teachers, build emotional bonds, and cultivate shared values and visions. Teachers who share information and participate in school management decisions have reported higher job satisfaction (Hong et al., 2018). In this way, distributed leadership may support the establishment and development of teachers’ professional identity.

Furthermore, the stronger teachers’ professional identity, the more likely they are to continue participating in professional development activities, thereby enhancing professional capabilities over the course of their careers (Beijaard et al., 2004). Distributed leadership emphasizes member participation. By fostering collaboration, trust, and participation, organizational members can share knowledge and exercise influence. This may motivate teachers to adopt a more proactive professional orientation and strengthen organizational identification and work engagement, thereby promoting teachers’ professional development (Groenewald & Arnold, 2025). Accordingly, Hypothesis 2 is proposed as follows: Primary school teachers’ professional identity mediates the relationship between principals’ distributed leadership and teachers’ professional development.

Methods

Research Subjects

The subjects of this study were primary school teachers in Hebei Province, China. This focus aligns with policy priorities described in the Hebei Education Department’s (2023) Action Plan for Building a Strong Education Hebei Education Department (2023–2027), which proposed “An Action Plan for Improving the Quality of Basic Education and an Action Plan for Improving the Quality of Teachers in the New Era,” and emphasized “Implementing the Strong Teacher Project, improving teachers’ professional quality, and strengthening the quality of regular school students’ training.” Therefore, this study aims to examine the ongoing professional development of primary school teachers in Hebei Province.

Data collection was conducted between December 1 and December 30, 2024. Convenience sampling was used to select 32 primary schools in Hebei Province, China, with 20 teachers recruited from each school. Participation was voluntary, and a total of 640 questionnaires were distributed. Before participation, teachers were informed of the purpose and procedures of the study, the anonymous nature of the survey, their right to decline participation or withdraw at any time without penalty, and the assurance that the study posed no harm to participants. Informed consent was obtained from all participating teachers prior to completing the online questionnaire via the WJX platform.

After invalid responses were removed, 581 valid questionnaires remained, yielding a valid response rate of 90.78%. The background variables in this study included teachers’ gender and teaching experience. The sample comprised 315 females (54.22%) and 266 males (45.78%). In terms of teaching experience, 183 teachers had 1 to 5 years (31.5%), 99 had 6 to 10 years (17.0%), 65 had 11 to 20 years (11.2%), and 234 had more than 21 years (40.3%).

Research Instruments

Distributed Leadership Scale

This study utilized the Distributed Leadership Scale developed by Özer and Beycioğlu (2013) to assess teachers’ perceptions of principals’ distributed leadership. The scale comprises 10 items and uses a five-point Likert scale. The scale was translated into Chinese using a translation and back translation procedure. First, the original scale was translated into Chinese by a bilingual translator. Subsequently, a second independent translator back translated the Chinese version into English to ensure the accuracy and equivalence of the translated scale. A pilot test was then conducted to examine the reliability of the Chinese version.

The scale’s reliability was evaluated, and Cronbach’s alpha was .944. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated χ²/df = 9.986. Although the χ²/df value exceeded commonly recommended thresholds, this result may be attributable to the large sample size and the sensitivity of the chi square statistic to minor model misspecifications. Previous research has noted that χ² can be overly sensitive in SEM and should not be used as the sole criterion for evaluating model fit. Multiple indicators should be considered to reach an overall judgment (Hair et al., 2019; Hu & Bentler, 1999; Kline, 2016). The SRMR was 0.041, which is below 0.080. The RFI was 0.903, and the CFI and IFI were 0.932, all exceeding 0.900. The PNFI was 0.719 and the PGFI was 0.568, both exceeding 0.500, indicating that the model fit was acceptable. Composite reliability (CR) was 0.946, meeting the criterion of 0.700 or higher. Average variance extracted (AVE) was 0.636, meeting the criterion of 0.500 or higher (Hair et al., 1998).

Teacher Professional Learning Community Scale

This study used the Teacher Professional Learning Community Scale developed by Vanblaere and Devos (2016). The scale comprises 11 items across three dimensions: collective responsibility, deprivatized practices, and reflective dialogue. The scale was translated into Chinese using a translation and back translation procedure. The Cronbach’s alpha values for the three dimensions were .837, .745, and .880, respectively, and the overall Cronbach’s alpha was .893.

Confirmatory factor analysis showed χ²/df = 7.470, with GFI = 0.897, AGFI = 0.835, and NFI = 0.910, all >0.800. SRMR = 0.049, which is <0.080. RFI = 0.903, CFI = 0.920, and IFI = 0.921, all >0.900. PNFI = 0.678 and PGFI = 0.557, both >0.500, indicating acceptable fit. Composite reliability (CR) values were 0.842 (collective responsibility), 0.755 (deprivatized practices), and 0.882 (reflective dialogue). Average variance extracted (AVE) values were 0.642 (collective responsibility), 0.510 (deprivatized practices), and 0.600 (reflective dialogue; Hair et al., 1998).

Teacher Professional Identity Scale

This study revised Wei et al.’s (2013) Professional Identity Scale for Primary and Secondary School Teachers (Chinese version). The original scale consisted of 18 items. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted, yielding KMO = 0.924 and a significant Bartlett’s test of sphericity (p < .001). Principal axis factoring and oblique rotation were used to obtain the rotated factor loading matrix. Based on the criterion of eigenvalues >1, the scale was divided into three factors: role values, professional values, and professional belonging. Factor loadings for these three factors ranged from 0.508 to 0.881, accounting for 71.213% of the total variance.

Cronbach’s alpha values for role values, professional values, and professional belonging were .909, .945, and .829, respectively, and the overall Cronbach’s alpha was .942. Confirmatory factor analysis using the formal questionnaire yielded χ²/df = 7.964. The GFI, AGFI, and NFI exceeded 0.800. The SRMR was 0.048 and <0.080. The RFI was 0.863. The CFI and IFI exceeded 0.900. PNFI = 0.761 and PGFI were both >0.500, indicating acceptable fit. The CRs for role values, professional values, and professional belonging were 0.912, 0.951, and 0.835, respectively. The AVEs for role values, professional values, and professional belonging were 0.634, 0.685, and 0.630, respectively. All results met the assessment criteria (Hair et al., 1998).

Teacher Professional Development Scale

This study employed the Teacher Professional Development Scale (Chinese version) developed by Chiu and Hsiao (2019). The scale comprises 12 items across three dimensions: Fulfilling Professional Attitudes, Enriching Professional Responsibilities, and Implementing Professional Autonomy. Cronbach’s alpha for the total scale was .931, and the Cronbach’s alpha values for Fulfilling Professional Attitudes, Enriching Professional Responsibilities, and Implementing Professional Autonomy were 0.933, 0.880, and 0.838, respectively.

Confirmatory factor analysis results indicated χ²/df = 8.748, GFI = 0.881, AGFI = 0.819, and NFI = 0.923. SRMR = 0.065. RFI = 0.900, CFI = 0.931, and IFI = 0.931. PNFI = 0.713 and PGFI = 0.576. The CRs were 0.933 (Fulfilling Professional Attitudes), 0.891 (Enriching Professional Responsibilities), and 0.84 (Implementing Professional Autonomy). The AVEs were 0.737 (Fulfilling Professional Attitudes), 0.672 (Enriching Professional Responsibilities), and 0.653 (Implementing Professional Autonomy). All results met the evaluation criteria (Hair et al., 1998).

Research Results

Common Method Bias Test

This study conducted an exploratory factor analysis incorporating Harman’s single-factor test. All questionnaire items were entered into the analysis, and eight factors with eigenvalues >1 were extracted. The first factor accounted for 37.497% of the total variance, which is below the 40% threshold and meets the recommended standard (Podsakoff et al., 2003). These results suggest that common method bias did not pose a significant threat to the data obtained from the formal questionnaire survey, supporting the use of the data for subsequent analyses.

Correlation Analysis

A correlation analysis was conducted for the four variables, and the results are summarized in Table 1. Correlation coefficients ranged from 0.408 to 0.628, and all correlations were statistically significant (p < .001), indicating that all variables were positively correlated. In addition, all correlation coefficients were below 0.800, suggesting that multicollinearity was unlikely to be a serious concern (Maruyama, 1998). Following the recommendation of Fornell and Larcker (1981), the square root of the AVE for each variable should exceed its correlations with other variables. The results showed that the square roots of AVE for all variables met this criterion, indicating acceptable discriminant validity.

Table 1.

Correlation Analysis of Variables.

Variables	M	SD	DL	PLC	TPI	TPD
DL	4.0425	0.826	0.797
PLC	3.7686	0.617	0.527***	0.664
TPI	4.3862	0.540	0.540***	0.493***	0.711
TPD	5.1989	0.648	0.408***	0.472***	0.628***	0.758

Note. The diagonal values are the square roots of the corresponding AVEs. DL = distributed leadership; PLC = teacher professional learning community; TPI = teacher professional identity; TPD = teacher professional development; M = mean; SD = standard deviation.

***

p < .001.

Structural Equation Model Analysis

Using structural equation modeling (SEM), this study treated distributed leadership as the independent variable and teacher professional development as the dependent variable, and examined the mediating effects of teacher professional learning community and teacher professional identity. In the analysis, the direct-effect model was used as the baseline, and mediation models were tested as the primary explanatory framework.

First, the direct effect of distributed leadership on teacher professional development was examined. The model fit index was χ²/df = 7.523. When χ²/df exceeds 5, additional goodness-of-fit indices are considered (Wheaton, 1987). The remaining fit indices indicated acceptable model fit: SRMR = 0.052, GFI = 0.884, AGFI = 0.835, and NFI = 0.916, all exceeding 0.800 (Doll et al., 1994; MacCallum & Hong, 1997; Ullman, 2001); RFI = 0.898, CFI = 0.926, and IFI = 0.926, all >0.900 (Bollen, 1989); and PNFI = 0.752 and PGFI = 0.622, both >0.500 (Mulaik et al., 1989). As shown in Figure 1, perceived principal distributed leadership had a significant positive effect on teacher professional development (path coefficient = 0.391, p < .001). Given that the baseline model supported a significant direct effect, mediation model testing was subsequently conducted.

Figure 1.

Direct effect model.

Structural Equation Model of Distributed Leadership, Teacher Professional Learning Community, and Teacher Professional Development

Next, the mediating role of teacher professional learning community in the relationship between principals’ distributed leadership and teacher professional development was examined. The structural model fit was satisfactory, with χ²/df = 6.379, SRMR = 0.063, GFI = 0.872, AGFI = 0.828, and NFI = 0.903, all >0.800 (Doll et al., 1994; MacCallum & Hong, 1997; Ullman, 2001); RFI = 0.885, CFI = 0.917, and IFI = 0.917, all >0.900 (Bollen, 1989); and PNFI = 0.760 and PGFI = 0.648, both >0.500 (Mulaik et al., 1989). As shown in Figure 2 and Table 2, principals’ distributed leadership had a significant positive effect on teacher professional learning community (β = .621, p < .001), which in turn significantly predicted teacher professional development (β = .516, p < .001). By contrast, the direct effect of principals’ distributed leadership on teacher professional development was not statistically significant (β = .068, p = .216), indicating a full mediation effect.

Figure 2.

Structural model of the mediating effect of teachers’ professional learning community.

Table 2.

Analysis of the Mediating Effect of Teachers’ Professional Learning Community.

Effect	Std. β	SE	z/CR	p	95% Confidence interval
Direct effect
Distributed leadership
Professional development	.068	0.035	1.238	.216	[−0.126, 0.276]
Professional learning community	.621	0.070	11.236	<.001	[0.498, 0.734]
Professional learning community
Professional development	.516	0.037	7.665	<.001	[0.325, 0.691]
Indirect effect
Distributed leadership
Professional learning community	.320			<.001	[0.183, 0.481]
Professional development
Total effect
Distributed leadership
Professional development	.388			<.001	[0.283, 0.487]

The difference between the correlation analysis and the SEM results can be attributed to methodological differences. Correlation analysis evaluates bivariate relationships without controlling for other variables and without accounting for measurement error. In contrast, SEM simultaneously estimates multiple relationships, incorporates latent variables, and controls for measurement error. Consequently, relationships that appear significant in correlation analysis may become non-significant within a theoretically specified SEM framework, particularly when mediating or suppressing effects are present (Conger, 1974; Preacher & Hayes, 2008).

To further test the mediation effect, a bias-corrected percentile bootstrap procedure with 5,000 resamples was employed to obtain a 95% confidence interval (Hayes, 2013). As reported in Table 2, the indirect effect of principals’ distributed leadership on teacher professional development through teacher professional learning community was 0.320, with a 95% confidence interval ranging from 0.183 to 0.481. Because this interval did not include zero, the indirect effect was statistically significant. Meanwhile, the 95% confidence interval for the direct effect included zero, confirming that the direct path was not significant. These results indicate that teacher professional learning community fully mediates the relationship between principals’ distributed leadership and teacher professional development, thereby supporting Hypothesis 1.

Finally, the proposed mediation model accounted for a substantial proportion of the variance in the endogenous variables, with R² = 0.385 for teacher professional learning community and R² = 0.314 for teacher professional development (Table 3).

Table 3.

Explained Variance (Squared Multiple Correlations).

Endogenous variable	R ²
Teacher professional learning community	0.385
Teacher professional development	0.314

Structural Equation Model of Distributed Leadership, Teacher Professional Identity, and Teacher Professional Development

This analysis examined the mediating role of teachers’ professional identity in the relationship between principals’ distributed leadership and teacher professional development. The structural model showed an acceptable overall fit (χ²/df = 6.833; SRMR = 0.053; GFI = 0.866; AGFI = 0.819; NFI = 0.899; RFI = 0.880; CFI = 0.912; IFI = 0.913; PNFI = 0.757; PGFI = 0.643), indicating that the proposed mediation framework was supported by the data.

As shown in Figure 3 and Table 4, principals’ distributed leadership was positively associated with teachers’ professional identity (β = .592, p < .001), and teachers’ professional identity, in turn, was strongly related to teacher professional development (β = .739, p < .001). After accounting for teachers’ professional identity, the direct association between principals’ distributed leadership and teacher professional development was not statistically significant (β = −.014, p = .776), suggesting that the relationship between distributed leadership and professional development was conveyed through teachers’ professional identity within this model.

Figure 3.

Structural model of the mediating effect of teachers’ professional identity.

Table 4.

Analysis of the Mediating Effect of Teachers’ Professional Identity.

Effect	Std. β	SE	z/CR	p	95% Confidence interval
Direct effect
Distributed leadership
Professional development	−.014	0.035	−0.285	.776	[−0.129, 0.092]
Professional identity	.592	0.037	11.254	<.001	[0.492, 0.686]
Professional identity
Professional development	.739	0.065	11.534	<.001	[0.580, 0.885]
Indirect effect
Distributed leadership
Professional identity	.438			<.001	[0.335, 0.573]
Professional development
Total effect
Distributed leadership
Professional development	.424			<.001	[0.324, 0.522]

Bootstrap analyses with 5,000 resamples further supported this mediation pattern. The indirect effect of principals’ distributed leadership on teacher professional development through teachers’ professional identity was 0.438, with a 95% confidence interval ranging from 0.335 to 0.573, which did not include zero. By contrast, the confidence interval for the direct effect included zero, whereas the total effect remained statistically significant. The proposed mediation model accounted for a substantial proportion of variance in the endogenous variables, with R² = 0.351 for teachers’ professional identity and R² = 0.534 for teacher professional development (Table 5). Taken together, these findings indicate that teachers’ professional identity functions as a full mediator in the relationship between principals’ distributed leadership and teacher professional development (H2 is valid).

Table 5.

Explained Variance (Squared Multiple Correlations).

Endogenous variable	R ²
Teacher professional identity	0.351
Teacher professional development	0.534

From an interpretive perspective, the magnitude of the indirect effect suggests that principals’ distributed leadership may contribute to teachers’ professional development by strengthening teachers’ professional identity, rather than primarily through direct managerial or structural mechanisms. In educational practice, this pattern implies that leadership practices emphasizing shared decision-making, professional recognition, and collective responsibility may be particularly effective when they enhance teachers’ self-perceptions as competent and committed professionals. Consequently, initiatives aimed at fostering teacher professional development may benefit from attending to both leadership structures and identity-related processes, as the latter appears to account for a substantial proportion of the overall effect.

Discussion

Mediating Role of Teacher Professional Learning Communities

The findings indicate that teacher professional learning communities fully mediate the relationship between principals’ distributed leadership and teachers’ professional development in primary schools in Hebei Province. From the perspective of distributed leadership theory, leadership is enacted through the interactions of multiple actors rather than residing solely in formal roles (Elmore, 2000; Gronn, 2002). Professional learning communities may therefore function as organizational platforms through which distributed leadership is enacted and expressed in collective learning processes.

When principals promote shared goals, collaborative decision-making, and the sharing of leadership responsibilities, teachers may be more likely to engage in sustained dialogue, joint reflection, and knowledge sharing within professional learning communities (Cherrington & Thornton, 2019; Ghamrawi et al., 2024). Practically, the contribution of principals’ distributed leadership to teacher development may be less a matter of direct supervisory actions and more a matter of whether school leaders support and institutionalize collaborative learning structures. Strengthening professional learning communities may thus represent a feasible pathway for schools seeking to enhance teachers’ professional development through distributed leadership practices.

Mediating Role of Teacher Professional Identity

The results also indicate that teachers’ professional identity fully mediates the relationship between principals’ distributed leadership and teachers’ professional development. Within the framework of distributed leadership theory, the distribution of authority and responsibility can be understood as an expression of professional trust and recognition, which may contribute to teachers’ sense of professional agency and belonging.

From a practical perspective, principals’ distributed leadership may support professional development by creating conditions that affirm teachers’ professional identities rather than relying primarily on direct instructional control. When teachers perceive themselves as competent and valued contributors to school improvement, they may be more inclined to engage in reflective practice, pursue professional learning opportunities, and sustain commitment in the face of challenges. Conversely, a weaker sense of professional identity may limit teachers’ engagement in professional growth activities (Frost & Harris, 2003). Taken together, these findings underscore the practical importance of leadership approaches that attend not only to organizational structures but also to teachers’ identity-related experiences when fostering professional development.

Conclusion

This study’s results indicate that distributed leadership by primary school principals in Hebei Province enhances teachers’ professional development. At the same time, the findings also showed that teachers’ professional learning community and professional identity fully mediated the relationship between principals’ distributed leadership and teachers’ professional development. This indicates that when professional learning community and professional identity are specified as mediating variables, the association between principals’ distributed leadership and teachers’ professional development is conveyed through teachers’ professional learning communities (Yang & Chang, 2024) and professional identities.

Furthermore, the mediating effect of professional identity (β = .438) exceeded that of the professional learning community (β = .320). This suggests that teachers’ professional identity and professional learning community in Hebei Province play important roles in the relationship between principals’ distributed leadership and teachers’ professional development. Accordingly, when principals adopt distributed leadership practices, attention to teachers’ professional identities and professional learning communities is relevant for supporting teachers’ professional development. Finally, the larger mediating effect of teachers’ professional identity compared with that of professional learning community represents a key finding of this study.

Recommendations

Principals Should Implement Distributed Leadership

The findings suggest that principals’ distributed leadership in primary schools in Hebei Province may enhance teachers’ professional development through teacher professional learning communities and professional identity. Teachers are key actors in professional development, and their autonomy should be fully acknowledged. Accordingly, efforts to support teachers’ professional development should encourage distributed leadership practices that provide teachers with greater autonomy and decision-making opportunities. Principals should actively implement distributed leadership by adopting a people-oriented approach, trusting teachers, and empowering them in ways that align with their professional characteristics. This can increase opportunities for teachers to participate in school management and support their development as professionally competent leaders. In addition, principals should prioritize interpersonal interaction and communication, foster a team atmosphere characterized by respect, trust, and openness, and create supportive conditions for teachers to participate in decision-making and management (Yang & Chang, 2024).

Establish a Teacher Professional Learning Community to Enhance Group Learning

Teachers’ professional learning communities play an important role in the relationship between principals’ distributed leadership and teachers’ professional development in Hebei Province. Schools should promote flatter organizational structures, reduce hierarchical constraints, establish diverse professional learning communities, encourage active teacher participation, and support professional learning and practical growth through teamwork. Teachers should also strengthen their awareness and willingness to participate in professional learning communities by engaging in lesson planning, class observation, and lesson research, and by collaboratively designing, implementing, and reflecting on teaching. In addition, teachers can exchange experiences, integrate collective expertise, and innovate teaching methods in areas such as student management, teacher–student communication, and research. Through interactive communication, teachers may update professional knowledge, strengthen professional capabilities, reinforce trust and a sense of belonging among members, and foster alignment between personal and school visions. In this way, professional learning communities may contribute to the comprehensive improvement of teachers’ professional qualities.

Enhance Teacher Professional Identity and Promote Professional Development

Primary school principals in Hebei Province should encourage teachers to participate in school decision-making and collective activities, provide appropriate empowerment, and affirm teachers’ professional competence. This can strengthen teachers’ autonomy, sense of belonging, and recognition. Schools can establish communication platforms such as practical problem-solving groups, teaching teams, and renowned teacher studios, and can organize team-building activities and one-on-one discussions to strengthen teachers’ professional understanding, professional skills, and professional confidence. Teachers may also deepen their understanding of their profession and roles, clarify role obligations and professional mission, and enhance professional pride and satisfaction. Through ongoing reflection on professional practice, reinforcement of positive emotional experiences and achievement expectations, and the continued development of teaching as an appealing professional choice, teachers’ professional identity can be strengthened, thereby supporting teachers’ professional development.

Limitations

This study employed convenience sampling to survey teachers from 32 elementary schools in Hebei Province, China. Because the research scope was limited to Hebei Province, the generalizability of the findings may be constrained. In addition, data collection was conducted within a 1-month period (December 1–December 30), which may have introduced temporal bias.

In the SEM analysis, potentially relevant contextual variables, such as school size, urban–rural location, and prior leadership experience, were not included. The omission of these background factors may have influenced, or partially accounted for, the observed relationships among the study variables.

Implications for Future Research

Given the full mediation identified in this study, future research may further examine whether professional learning communities and professional identity function sequentially rather than as parallel mechanisms, particularly whether engagement in collaborative learning is associated with the development of professional identity, which in turn relates to professional development. The comparatively stronger mediating effect of professional identity also suggests the need for additional inquiry into the relative role of identity-related and structural processes within distributed leadership frameworks. Further investigation may also clarify the conditions under which distributed leadership demonstrates a direct association with teachers’ professional development.

Footnotes

ORCID iD

Xiaomin Yang

Ethical Considerations

This study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Dhurakij Pundit University (approval no. DPU-BSH 080267/2566).

Consent to Participate

All participants were informed about the purpose of the research, the voluntary nature of their participation, and their right to withdraw at any time without penalty. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The research was funded by the Special Project for the Research Start-up of High-level Talents of Hengshui University, Hebei Province, China, grant number 2025GC31.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

Data can be made available to researchers by contacting the corresponding author.

References

Ahmed

Kiran

Bibi

Noureen

(2025). The power of distributed leadership: Empowering educators for success. Journal of Political Stability Archive, 3(3), 824–839. https://doi.org/10.63468/jpsa.3.3.55

Amzat

I. H.

Yanti

P. G.

Suswandari

(2022). Estimating the effect of principal instructional and distributed leadership on professional development of teachers in Jakarta, Indonesia. Sage Open, 12(3), 215824402211095. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221109585

Anthony

A. B.

Gimbert

B. G.

Luke

J. B.

Hurt

M. H.

(2019). Distributed leadership in context: Teacher leaders’ contributions to novice teacher induction. Journal of School Leadership, 29(1), 54–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052684618825086

Aubrey

Godfrey

Harris

(2013). How do they manage? An investigation of early childhood leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 41(1), 5–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143212462702

Azorín

Harris

Jones

(2020). Taking a distributed perspective on leading professional learning networks. School Leadership & Management, 40(2–3), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1647418

Beijaard

Meijer

P. C.

Verloop

(2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2003.07.001

Bollen

K. A.

(1989). Structure equations with latent variables. John Wiley.

Bufalino

(2025). Leading schools from the Middle. Middle leadership in a context of distributed leadership. Formazione & Insegnamento, 15(3), 151–161.

Canrinus

E. T.

Helms-Lorenz

Beijaard

Buitink

Hofman

(2012). Self-efficacy, job satisfaction, motivation and commitment: Exploring the relationships between indicators of teachers’ professional identity. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 27(1), 115–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-011-0069-2

10.

Cao

Huang

Shao

Zhong

(2025). Driving innovation: Exploring the effect of distributed leadership on collective teacher innovativeness in Chinese schools. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 34(1), 433–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-024-00866-x

11.

Cherrington

Thornton

(2019). The nature of professional learning communities in New Zealand early childhood education: An exploratory study. In Waters

Payler

Jones

(Eds.), The professional development of early years educators (pp. 152–170). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203712658-9

12.

Chiu

H. Y.

Hsiao

C. C.

(2019). The study of the relationship between teachers’ teaching styles and teaching effectiveness in high schools—The mediating effects of teachers’ professional developments and the moderating effects of organizational cultures of schools. Contemporary Educational Research Quarterly, 27(1), 39-78. https://doi.org/10.6151/CERQ.201903_27(1).0002

13.

Colmer

(2017). Collaborative professional learning: Contributing to the growth of leadership, professional identity and professionalism. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 25(3), 436–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2017.1308167

14.

Conger

A. J.

(1974). A revised definition for suppressor variables: A guide to their identification and interpretation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34(1), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447403400105

15.

Day

Kington

Stobart

Sammons

(2006). The personal and professional selves of teachers. British Educational Research Journal, 32(4), 601–616. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920600775316

16.

Doll

W. J.

Xia

Torkzadeh

(1994). A conﬁrmatory factor analysis of the end-user computing satisfaction instrument. MIS Quarterly, 18(4), 357–369. https://doi.org/10.2307/249524

17.

Elmore

R. F.

(2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Albert Shanker Institute.

18.

Fornell

Larcker

D. F.

(1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

19.

Frost

Harris

(2003). Teacher leadership: Towards a research agenda. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 479–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764032000122078

20.

Galdames-Calderón

(2023). Distributed leadership: School principals’ practices to promote teachers’ professional development for school improvement. Education Sciences, 13(7), 715. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070715

21.

Ghamrawi

Shal

Ghamrawi

N. A. R.

(2024). Cultivating teacher leadership: Evidence form a transformative professional development model. School Leadership & Management, 44(4), 413–441. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2024.2328056

22.

Groenewald

Arnold

(2025). Teacher professional identity: Agentic actions of a novice teacher in a challenging school context. Teachers and Teaching, 31(3), 453–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2024.2308890

23.

Gronn

(2002). Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(4), 423–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00120-0

24.

Hair

J. F.

Anderson

R. E.

Tatham

R. L.

Black

W. C

(1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Prentice–Hall.

25.

Hair

J. F.

Black

W. C.

Babin

B. J.

Anderson

R. E.

(2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage.

26.

Hallinger

Hosseingholizadeh

Hashemi

Kouhsari

(2018). Do beliefs make a difference? Exploring how principal self-efficacy and instructional leadership impact teacher efficacy and commitment in Iran. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(5), 800–819. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217700283

27.

Hamzah

M. I. M.

Jamil

M. F.

(2019). The relationship of distributed leadership and professional learning community. Creative Education, 10(12), 2730–2741. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.1012199

28.

Harris

Jones

(2017). Middle leaders’ matter: Reflections, recognition, and renaissance. School Leadership & Management, 37(3), 213–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2017.1323398

29.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. The Guilford Press.

30.

Guo

Abazie

G. A.

(2024). School principals’ instructional leadership as a predictor of teacher’s professional development. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 9(1), 63. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-024-00290-0

31.

Hebei Education Department. (2023). Action plan for building a strong education province (2023–2027). http://jyt.hebei.gov.cn/col/1405610764482/2023/02/27/1677496453835.html

32.

Hebei Provincial Bureau of Statistics. (2025). Hebei Province statistical yearbook (2024). http://tjj.hebei.gov.cn/hbstjj/tjnj/2024/zk/indexch.htm

33.

Hong

J. C.

Lin

S. S. J.

Chen

Y. C.

(2018). Distributed leadership, teacher professional identity, and teachers’ job satisfaction: The case of Taiwan. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(2), 298–315.

34.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

35.

Hulpia

Devos

Van Keer

(2011). The relation between school leadership from a distributed perspective and teachers’ organizational commitment: Examining the source of the leadership function. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(5), 728–771. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X11402065

36.

Joo

Y. H.

(2020). The effects of distributed leadership on teacher professionalism: The case of Korean middle schools. International Journal of Educational Research, 99, 101500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.101500

37.

Karakose

(2023). The scientific evolution of social justice leadership in education: Structural and longitudinal analysis of the existing knowledge base, 2003–2022. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1139648.

38.

Kline

R. B.

(2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.

39.

Koris

McKinnon

(2023). The power of international online conversations: Higher education teachers’ reflections on their impact on academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 28(3), 348–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2021.2007931

40.

MacCallum

R. C.

Hong

(1997). Power analysis in covariance structure modeling using GFI and AGFI. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32(2), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3202_5

41.

Maruyama

G. M.

(1998). Basics of structural equation modeling. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483345109

42.

Mulaik

S. A.

James

L. R.

Van Alstine

J. V.

Bennett

Lind

Stilwell

C. D.

(1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 430–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.430

43.

Nadeem

(2024). Distributed leadership in educational contexts: A catalyst for school improvement. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 9, 100835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.100835

44.

Olatunde-Aiyedun

T. G.

Ogunode

N. J.

(2021). School administration and effective teaching methods in science education in Nigeria. International Journal on Integrated Education, 4(2), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/S6N2Q

45.

Olmo-Extremera

Fernández-Terol

Domingo-Segovia

(2024). Leading a professional learning community in elementary education: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 19(1), 53–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/19427751221145207

46.

Ozdogru

Tulubas

Karakose

Kanadlı

Kardas

Papadakis

(2025). How does teacher self-efficacy mediate the relationship between student outcomes and principal leadership for learning? Results from meta-analytic structural equation modelling (MASEM). Acta Psychologica, 258, 105144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105144

47.

Özer

Beycioğlu

(2013). The development, validity and reliability study of distributed leadership scale. Elementary Education Online, 12(1), 77–86. http://abakus.inonu.edu.tr/xmlui/handle/123456789/17191

48.

Podsakoff

P. M.

MacKenzie

S. B.

Lee

J. Y.

Podsakoff

N. P.

(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

49.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879

50.

Sachs

(2005). Teacher professional identity: Competing discourses, competing outcomes. Educational Researcher, 34(5), 15–21. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034005015

51.

Segal

(2024). Rethinking collective reflection in teacher professional development. Journal of Teacher Education, 75(2), 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231188702

52.

Shin

H. S.

Joo

Y. H.

(2016). Issues and challenges of distributed leadership research. Korean Educational Administration Society, 1(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.22553/keas.2016.1.1.1

53.

Smith

W. M.

Funk

Quaisley

McMillon

(2025). Building a culture that empowers and motivates mathematics teacher leaders as change agents. School Science and Mathematics, 125(5), 506–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.18329

54.

Spillane

J. P.

Halverson

Diamond

J. B.

(2004). Toward a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027032000106726

55.

Stoll

Bolam

McMahon

Wallace

Thomas

(2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), 221–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-006-0001-8

56.

Ullman

J. B.

(2001). Structural equation modeling. In Tabachnick

B. G.

Fidell

L. S.

(Eds.), Using multivariate statistics. Pearson Education.

57.

Vanblaere

Devos

(2016). Relating school leadership to perceived professional learning community characteristics: A multilevel analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 57, 26–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.03.003

58.

Wei

Song

Zhang

(2013). Study on primary, middle and high school teachers’ professional identity: Structure and scale. Teacher Education Research, 25(1), 55–60.

59.

Wenger

(1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.

60.

Wheaton

(1987). Assessment of fit in overidentified models with latent variables. Sociological Methods & Research, 16(1), 118–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124187016001005

61.

Yang

Chang

Y.-C.

(2024). The effects of perceived distributed leadership on teacher professional development among primary school teachers: The mediating role of teacher professional learning community. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 8(4), 163–177. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202429304