Editorial: Making networks work: the central role of facilitators in PLNs

Imagine walking into a room filled with educators from different schools, each bringing their own experiences, contexts and priorities. There is no agenda, no boss and no script – just a shared desire to collaborate toward improving teaching and learning. While this situation offers opportunities for fruitful collaboration, this special issue indicates that collaboration must be orchestrated, cultivated and sustained. In this way, the facilitator in a professional learning network (PLN) is much like a conductor of an orchestra – tuning into the group's rhythm, knowing when to guide and when to step back and ensuring harmony across diverse voices. Though often working behind the scenes, facilitators play a pivotal role in shaping how networks function, learn and grow.And yet, the facilitator role has been an under-studied and under-addressed topic in the PLN literature to date. The collection of papers in this special issue offers diverse perspectives that, taken together, offer a unique view into the multifaceted and instrumental role that facilitators play in (the success of) PLNs. While the contexts, professional affiliations and approaches of facilitators vary across the six papers, several themes emerge that shed light on the specific role they play in fostering collaborative inquiry, professional learning and system change in PLNs. This discussion draws connections and key insights across the chapters and suggests areas for further inquiry and development.Taken together, the studies reinforce existing literature on the key factors needed to design and lead effective PLNs (e.g. a focus on shared goals) while contributing new and valuable insights into the pivotal role of facilitators in fostering those conditions. Below, we discuss the themes that arose across the papers.Several of the studies in this special issue (Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter, 2026; Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026; Lai et al., 2026) highlight how facilitators constantly adjusted their approaches based on participants' needs and context. For example, in the PLNs studied by Lai et al. (2026), designers developed inquiry-based protocols for each PLN but left it to each facilitator's discretion to adapt or decide how to use them based on the unique dynamics of the PLN. As a result, different facilitators enacted the same discussion protocols in different ways, with some facilitators following the protocols closely and others choosing to more lightly reference them to guide discussions. Another example of facilitator flexibility comes from Jesacher-Roessler et al. (2026), who explain that, in the PLNs they studied, participants often did not work with predefined roles and responsibilities. Instead, the PLNs adopted “a dynamic process where roles (were) negotiated collectively as they evolved.” This promoted shared responsibility and led to effective, non-hierarchical collaboration.Multiple papers also articulate context-dependent tensions facilitators need to manage, such as balancing structure with flexibility (e.g. allowing flexible participation in the PLN versus having stable learning communities) (Lai et al., 2026), navigating power dynamics between insiders and outsiders (Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026), enabling both goal-oriented and emergent learning (MacGregor and Friesen, 2026), choosing to focus on depth or breadth of knowledge building (Lai et al., 2026) or tailoring activities to suit online or face-to-face meeting environments (Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter, 2026). These tensions highlight that facilitation is not a technical task but a relational and often political practice. Skilled facilitation requires recognizing and actively navigating these dilemmas to best benefit the group.Multiple studies discussed in this issue underscore how facilitators support PLNs in developing and maintaining shared goals that are grounded in participant context and student needs (Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter, 2026; Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026; Pino-Yankovic et al., 2026). Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter (2026), for example, conclude that when learning activities are not aligned with the intended purpose and goals of the PLN and participants' daily practice, PLN members feel less connected to and have lower levels of engagement with the PLN. Moreover, there is some evidence that well-functioning PLNs prioritize shared goals focused on educational needs and outcomes at the student level, such as learning, achievement and well-being (Lai et al., 2026; Pino-Yankovic et al., 2026). When facilitators tap into the group's collective ambition and use shared goals to guide activities, participants feel more connected and engaged (Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter, 2026).Having common procedures, guidelines and resources in place can help with facilitating the work of a PLN. Facilitators use tools, such as structured protocols and prompts, to not only support collaboration and reflection but also to help make knowledge actionable within local school contexts (Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026; Lai et al., 2026; Schnellert et al., 2026). And when facilitators consistently use the same protocols or routines over time, participants can focus time and energy on the work at hand rather than learning how to effectively use a new process or tool (Lai et al., 2026). For example, facilitators often guide participants in cycles of inquiry into classroom practice as a key strategy for supporting changes in practice. Authors found that PLN activities where facilitators routinely guided teachers to jointly assess student and teacher data were linked with greater innovation, where teachers challenged traditional practices and developed new routines in schools (Pino-Yankovic et al., 2026) and more responsive teaching, where teachers adapted practices to meet local needs (Schnellert et al., 2026). Facilitators used tools and prompts to help teachers draw connections between theory and their in situ practices. The study by Lai et al. (2026) described how these protocols and prompts were designed to guide teachers to think about how to design, enact and reflect on their reading apprenticeship-influenced lessons.Sometimes program protocols were used at the discretion of the facilitators, resulting in wide variation in use (see, for example, Lai et al., 2026). This raises questions about how strictly facilitators need to adhere to tools designed to support reflection and collaborative work to reach program goals while also being adaptive to local wants and needs. While effective facilitation requires flexibility and adaptability, as discussed above, Pino-Yankovic et al. (2026) found that despite having common PLN frameworks in place, the network's ability to mobilize knowledge was ultimately limited due to facilitators not being provided with specific instructions for facilitating their use. So, while PLN procedures and protocols can be used to foster common understanding and promote unified direction (Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026), there is more to learn about how the level of facilitator autonomy in using such tools impacts a group's ability to achieve its goals.Facilitators help cultivate social and emotional conditions necessary for individual and group learning. They design activities intentionally to build trust, mutual respect and psychological safety among groups to promote meaningful interactions while attending to group norms (Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter, 2026; Schnellert et al., 2026). Trust enables risk-taking and candid reflection, both of which are essential for deep professional learning. The papers in this special issue offer several concrete suggestions for how facilitators can nurture trusting relationships.Consistent with the PLN literature, authors found working together on a shared goal can lead to more commitment, engagement and trust (Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter, 2026; Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026; Schnellert et al., 2026). Helping participants develop and adhere to shared commitments and agreements for accomplishing their goals, such as complying with schedules and organizational planning, can lead to a shared assumption of responsibility and build trust (Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026).The nature of the collaborative work itself can also help build relationships and trust. For example, Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter (2026) found that participants developed a sense of shared identity and equal relationships when working face-to-face to develop and adapt products together, select common materials to use in practice and exchange practical experiences.Consistent and long-term collaboration among group members can also build trust (Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026). However, as pointed out by Lai et al. (2026), this is difficult to achieve, as PLN membership is likely to change over time. Even when collaborative groups are designed to be stable over time, natural turnover among individual group members is inevitable due to changes in life circumstances and professional roles. Therefore, both Lai et al. (2026) and Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter (2026) advise that facilitators continuously invest in helping participants get to know each other and build relationships and a sense of community. A sense of community is important for meaningful interactions, commitment to the network's shared goals, knowledge sharing and support from other participants (Pei et al., 2024).Several papers discuss the related concepts of power and agency in PLNs (Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter, 2026; Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026; Pino-Yankovic et al., 2026; Schnellert et al., 2026). The findings from Jesacher-Roessler et al. (2026) show that rather than predefining roles and responsibilities in a PLN, PLNs in their study succeeded by adopting a dynamic process where roles were negotiated collectively and continuously renegotiated to promote equitable participation. For example, a facilitator might change from an external host, moderator or mere organizer to an active participant of a PLN, gradually becoming equal partners in the PLN (Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026).Engaging all stakeholders can enhance the equity, effectiveness and sustainability of PLNs. PLNs often inherently embody the principles of shared leadership by providing opportunities for teachers without official leadership roles to participate in decision-making and share their expertise and insights (Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026). Assigning facilitation roles based on positional authority (e.g. school leaders) is not always effective. Facilitation can also be operated as a collective effort, with plans and decisions made by groups rather than individuals (Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026). When it comes to power and agency, in some cases it might make sense to start with top-down, externally determined objectives and procedures guided by a school leader, as this gives clarity and structure. However, this can lead to PLN participants feeling too restricted and a lack of ownership; a PLN then needs to move towards more self-regulation and agency, where participants make their own decisions (Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026).Furthermore, facilitation activities should foster active participation, engagement and agency (Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter, 2026; Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026; Pino-Yankovic et al., 2026; Schnellert et al., 2026), for example, by providing opportunities for PLN members to make choices about how to participate (Schnellert et al., 2026), prioritizing participatory and reflective methodologies, using collaborative inquiry methodologies and collective practice analysis (Pino-Yankovic et al., 2026) and establishing goals PLN members deem relevant for their own practice context and learning needs (Schnellert et al., 2026). This can lead to a sense of equality, reciprocity and safety (Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter, 2026).Facilitators bring their own expertise, perspectives and experiences to the role that influence the moves they make and the value they bring to the PLNs they are facilitating. Facilitators serve as knowledge resources themselves while also promoting wider knowledge mobilization within and beyond PLNs. Facilitators curate, translate and adapt knowledge for local use, often mediating between policy, research and practice.Several of the studies highlight the importance of facilitators introducing new ideas to help PLN participants bridge theory and practice, whether those ideas stem from the research base or from practical experience. For example, Schnellert et al. (2026) found that researcher-facilitators often brought expertise in topics teachers wanted to learn more about and therefore incorporated facilitator actions such as sharing relevant resources and modeling evidence-based lessons to co-construct knowledge with participating educators. This is also evident in the paper by MacGregor and Friesen (2026), where leaders within PLNs surfaced and learned from failure experiences, suggesting that facilitators create spaces for honest reflection and sensemaking.Facilitators also play an important role in the use of evidence in PLNs. PLNs provide participants with opportunities for teachers to step back from their practice and make evidence-informed meaning of their experiences. Facilitators support PLN participants in co-constructing knowledge based on their own experience, local school data and research evidence (Lai et al., 2026; Pino-Yankovic et al., 2026; Schnellert et al., 2026).A key PLN design consideration is deciding who gets to participate. For example, in the study by Jesacher-Roessler et al. (2026), some PLNs consisted of educators who were appointed by the principals, while others consisted of volunteers. This may influence how a PLN functions, and facilitators need to take this into account (Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026). For example, facilitators working with groups who were directed to participate may want to spend more time upfront helping the group form a sense of community, explore areas of mutual interest and reach consensus on shared goals that feel meaningful and worthy of effort to participants.Usually PLN participants consist of different stakeholders, such as superintendents, principals and teachers, bringing together diverse perspectives so that stakeholders can learn from each other (Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026). Although the literature emphasizes the importance of student voice and students as stakeholders and active participants in school improvement processes (e.g. Mager and Nowak, 2012; Pearce and Wood, 2019; Schildkamp et al., 2024) such as PLNs, only Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter (2026) discuss the role of students (i.e. student teachers) in a PLN. The other studies included in this issue often focus on student learning as a desired outcome of the PLN, but they do not include students in the PLN. Including students in a PLN may have consequences for facilitation. Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter (2026), for example, found that when student teachers participate in a PLN, specific attention must be paid to connectedness and equality between student teachers and other PLN participants.While facilitators work with specific PLN participants, their influence often extends across the system (Jesacher-Roessler et al., 2026; MacGregor and Friesen, 2026; Pino-Yankovic et al., 2026). Facilitators help identify synergies among participating entities and ensure that network insights are applied widely within schools, including by those not directly involved in the network. As stated by Jeseacher-Roesler et al. (2026), this requires targeted strategies to embed new knowledge into the system and sustain its impact. Pino-Yankovic et al. (2026) stress that a systemic perspective not only includes attention to knowledge mobilization within networks but also integration of that knowledge into the educational routines of participating schools in their local sites. They found that well-functioning PLNs were more likely to engage in activities that supported the integration of knowledge into school practices and, in some cases, the development of innovative approaches (Pino-Yankovic et al., 2026).It is important that PLN members not only have opportunities to share successes and practical experiences (Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter, 2026; Pino-Yankovic et al., 2026) but that there is also time to learn from failures (MacGregor and Friesen, 2026). Failure can be viewed as an opportunity for collective learning and adaptation, which can enable collaborative efforts that transcend the limitations of individual schools. This implies facilitators might make time for systematically sharing failures, which can help to improve decision-making at different levels of the system (MacGregor and Friesen, 2026).Two papers in this special issue focused on hybrid or online PLNs (Lai et al., 2026; Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter, 2026). Both papers highlight the value of providing professional development for facilitators in digital pedagogies and online facilitation. They discuss the importance of training that covers both new technology skills and understanding how adults learn online, along with practical strategies for effective virtual meeting facilitation.Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter (2026) found that online PLN meetings have several benefits, such as being able to schedule appointments faster, providing regular contact among participants between face-to-face activities and promoting active participation through the use of the chat function and online collaboration tools. However, they also found disadvantages to online PLN meetings, such as the potential for scheduling conflicts and low active participation, unequal input from participants when project leaders do most of the talking, low personal connectedness among participants due to difficulties seeing and interpreting non-verbal communication, faltering technology and a lack of connection with the whole group when working in subgroups. So, an important consideration when facilitating hybrid PLNs is deciding which type of collaborative activities are best carried out online versus face-to-face. Henderikx and Vrieling-Teunter (2026) found that online meetings are good for discussing practical experiences and maintaining focus on short-term goals, while face-to-face meetings were favored for more involved collaborative work such as product development. Lai et al. (2026) found online interactions typically focus more on breadth of inquiry, such as online discussion forums where participants post a range of instructional strategies that they trialed. This could allow a face-to-face PLN meeting to be used for more in-depth inquiry into challenging problems.While the authors in this issue make a significant contribution to helping us better understand the PLN facilitation role, the studies – with the notable exception of the mixed-methods study conducted by Pino-Yankovic et al. (2026) – are primarily based on data collected in a relatively short time frame, have small sample sizes and are largely based on retrospective case studies using qualitative methods (e.g. interviews, recordings of PLN meetings and document analysis). We propose a few areas ripe for further exploration to advance this important body of knowledge.Firstly, in terms of studying PLNs, we suggest more large-scale studies that leverage emerging technological capabilities. For example, researchers could make use of AI applications to analyze the learning conversations taking place in a PLN and how it is facilitated. Conversations can be recorded and largely automatically analyzed using machine learning techniques. The field would also benefit from more longitudinal approaches to these large-scale studies to shed light on how PLN facilitators' roles evolve over time as networks mature. For example, studies might examine whether attention to relationship and trust building is a consistent priority for PLN facilitators, or whether a facilitator's role in fostering social cohesion is more critical at particular points in time, such as early formation or during phases of rapid growth. Or, they might investigate how the need for a facilitator's use of protocols and other scaffolds to support group dialog and collaboration evolves as groups work together long-term. Furthermore, the role of AI in PLNs also needs further investigation. Could an AI agent become a PLN participant? Could an AI agent take over (part of) the facilitator's role?Secondly, PLN studies often focus on participants' learning and development, but we argue that we need to invest in and study the professional preparation, learning and development of PLN facilitators as well. The studies in this issue illustrate the wide variety of primary professional roles from which PLN facilitators are drawn – from university researchers to participating teachers and system leaders to professional development specialists. Often PLN facilitators volunteer for or are assigned to their roles without training in strategies for and groups through activities that are for learning and As Jesacher-Roessler et al. (2026) in their research could focus on the essential knowledge and skills needed for effective PLN facilitation. PLN facilitators may also need professional development and For some studies in this special issue show that facilitators need to know how to guide reflection in a facilitation of reflection can support teachers in not just understanding of important instructional practices like but also when and these should be which can support more responsive teaching and adaptive expertise et al., and several studies also the need for facilitators to to relationship development and power dynamics within we need to move beyond of the facilitator role and examine the among facilitator actions and a intended and student For example, it would be to investigate the to which particular facilitation strategies or activities lead to intended changes in teacher knowledge and which then lead to changes in classroom practice and, changes in student As stated by Pino-Yankovic et al. (2026), we need to PLNs with specific outcomes at the school level of on individual changes among network studies to investigate the of PLNs on teacher and student with qualitative to investigate how facilitation practices within PLNs have supported these changes in can be a direction to this in the studies in this special facilitators emerge as essential and adaptive for collective learning who build between educators ideas and rather than As PLNs to be the as for improving teaching, learning and system it is essential that we not only focus on networks do and achieve – but on how facilitators enable them to function effectively and reach their role is not it is