This chapter introduces the mandate and research base for the work at the OECD on New Professionalism and the Future of Teaching. It argues for the need to develop new ways of thinking that can shape positive, sustainable futures for the teaching profession. How can we anticipate the future of the teaching profession? How can we plan for the future of teaching? And most importantly, how can we create a future that respects current teachers, attracts new teachers, and addresses today’s issues in education? It presents key concepts used to develop a methodology to support the co-construction with teachers and other stakeholders of preferred scenarios for the future of teaching. This is anchored in a review of OECD work on teachers and teaching.
Co‑constructing Visions for the Future of Teaching
Abstract
Teaching is a profession with strong ethical roots. Many talented and dedicated individuals are drawn to it by a desire to work with children and to contribute to society. The OECD’s Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) in 2024 reaffirms that these motivations remain central: working with children and contributing to society continue to be the main reasons people enter teaching (OECD, 2025[1]). This has been a constant finding across the past four TALIS cycles, dating back to 2008.
At the same time, teachers perceive a lack of prestige for their profession. In 2024, just over one in five lower secondary teachers think the teaching profession is valued in society, on average (OECD, 2025[1]).This gap between teachers’ commitment to the common good and their perceived professional standing is striking. It risks weakening professional identity and can be disempowering for the profession. What is fuelling this perception?
Like all professions, teaching is shaped by the changing environment we live in today. Social, economic and technological changes are challenging traditional aspects of professionalism and call for an updated and evolving understanding of what it means to be a professional today. One example is the increasingly easy access to information which challenges professionals’ traditional monopoly over their area of expertise (Mezza, 2022[2]). The public holds professionals to higher standards. Teachers feel this through growing public demands on schools, with direct consequences for their working lives (OECD, 2025[3]).
Professional identity is being influenced and shaped by the complexity teachers’ working contexts. Demographic change is altering both student populations and the teacher workforce itself. Schools are ever more multicultural, with striking changes reported by school principals between 2018 and 2024, in terms of increased numbers of refugees, immigrant students or students with a migrant background in their schools (OECD, 2025[1]). Yet only around a third of recently graduated lower secondary teachers report that their formal education prepared them for teaching in a multicultural or multilingual setting (OECD, 2025[1]). What support do teachers need to feel equipped and confident in these environments?
Technological change is another defining feature of contemporary professionalism. Professionals are increasingly dependent on external input (Mezza, 2022[2]) while also needing a voice in shaping how these tools are used. In 2024, nearly seven in ten lower secondary teachers, on average, report working in schools where they have significant responsibility for making decisions about the use of digital resources for instruction (OECD, 2025[1]). This places new demands on skills development as technology evolves. Teachers are already integrating AI tools – tools that did not exist a few years ago – to support lesson planning, grading, and student engagement. In 2024, nearly four in ten lower secondary teachers were trained in the use of AI and three in ten signal this a priority area for professional development going forward (OECD, 2025[1]). How can teachers be more involved in shaping these tools for their pedagogical needs?
As professionals are experiencing reduced control over the conditions (Randall and Kindiak, 2008[4]; Mezza, 2022[2]), new forms of professionalism are emerging. These place greater emphasis on relational and collaborative skills. The ability to connect with others to solve problems and seize opportunities in complex contexts is increasingly seen as a core professional competence (Mezza, 2022[2]; McGrath, 2023[5]; Nilsson Brodén, 2022[6]). Teaching is well placed to lead the way in forging this new “connective” professionalism. The importance of relationships is clear for teachers in their working lives. M (OECD, 2025[1]). What kinds of professional connections matter for empowering teachers?
Broader changes in what people look for in professional life are also reshaping expectations of the teaching profession. Flexibility and autonomy, meaning and purpose, and a healthy work environment are now key considerations for choosing a career. The rise of part-time and remote work has led to a shift in the expectations around balancing professional and personal lives (OECD, 2025[3]). Younger teachers are more likely to work part time in many education systems already (OECD, 2025[1]). To some extent this may reflect a valuing of flexibility (OECD, 2025[3]). Is the work-life balance right in teaching? Only one in ten lower secondary teachers, on average, agree that their job leaves time for their personal life (OECD, 2025[1]). In some OECD systems with available data, between 4 and 10 percent of teachers had resigned in the academic year 2022/23 (OECD, 2025[7]). How many of those were seeking more flexibility, balance with their personal lives and opportunities for development?
Against the backdrop of tight labour markets (OECD, 2025[8]) it is unsurprising that policies to attract people into teaching are a priority for 32 of 33 education systems (OECD, 2024[9]). While a shared desire to support children and contribute to society remains a powerful motivator, it might no longer be sufficient on its own. Education systems need to rethink what the teaching profession offers. How can teaching provide compelling reasons for current teachers to stay and grow, appeal to the next generation and attract and support mid-career changers? What is needed to empower the teaching profession?
The Centre for Educational Research and Innovation’s (CERI) New Professionalism and the Future of Teaching (NPFT) project addresses these questions through a theoretical framework designed to support teachers and others with a stake in education to construct a vision for the future of the profession. The model underlines the potential of a strengthened focus on teacher professional identity and its evolution over time, with a central role for collaboration and creating space for teacher autonomy. This chapter presents the steps taken to develop and implement this work.
Creating space to think about the future we would want for the teaching profession helps establish both long-term directions and actions that we can take now to get there.
During 2021-22, national representatives who drive the OECD’s education work on survey development, policy, research and innovation, took time to engage in a collective reflection on priorities for future work on teaching at the OECD. What work would be of most relevance to inform future teaching policy and support the teaching profession? The results of this exercise are presented in Table 1.1.
The initial disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic was the context for these discussions. The prevailing attitude at the time was that the crisis had provided a push for real changes and innovations to teaching and learning, and that there would likely be further disruptions going forward (OECD, 2020[10]). It was also broadly recognised that teachers had been at the forefront of finding solutions on an immediate practical level (International Summit of the Teaching Profession 2022, Education International briefing). The crisis had also shed light on tensions for teaching professionals, including seeking the right balance of flexibility of curricula in schools and national supports.
Disruptions to work, the ever-changing societal context and technological developments all put greater focus on the need for confident and agile professionals. In short, the collective reflection on the future of teaching among the OECD education communities pointed to the need to explore how to empower teachers in response to a rapidly changing world (see highlight in Table 1.1). What could we learn about the potential in developing a strong professional identity and teacher agency? Importantly, countries signalled interest in developing approaches that would provide the perspective of teachers and school leaders on how to bring about educational transformation.
Note: The highlighted text reflects the positioning of the CERI New Professionalism and the Future of Teaching work. This framework was developed during 2021 and 2022 with three symposia on the future of teaching bringing together international experts and representatives from the OECD’s Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, Education Policy Committee, Programme for International Student Assessment and Teaching and Learning International Survey.
The CERI’s NPFT project took up this challenge aiming to create space for structured discussions on the future of teaching in different education systems. These should engage teachers, school leaders and other actors with a stake in education, be anchored in and inspired by the international evidence base on teaching, be aspirational in nature (what would we like to see more of in the future?) and identify concrete actions to take toward the future that participants envisage.
Creating the space to consider multiple possibilities over the longer term is a form of “collective foresight” and “strategic intelligence”. Future approaches do not try to predict the future (OECD, 2021[11]; Amsler and Facer, 2017[12]). However, thinking about the longer term can both provide strategic direction and influence decisions in the present (Wood et al., 2021[13]). The choice to focus on what we would like to see in the future (preferred futures) can help take immediate decisions with greater intention toward achieving our desired future goals (Hsu, 2020[14]). Although connecting futures approaches with policy making can be challenging, it offers opportunities to transform decision making in meaningful ways (Robinson et al., 2021[15]).
The project conducted in-depth studies on the future of teaching in the Flemish Community of Belgium (hereinafter Flanders) (OECD, 2024[16]), Wales (OECD, 2025[17]), Austria (OECD, 2025[18]) and Malta (OECD, forthcoming[19]). Each study included a survey and findings show that teachers, school leaders and other stakeholders value having space to reflect on the future of teaching. (see Table 1.2). Feedback from participants of in-person workshops included that the process had provided greater opportunity to consider more optimistic possibilities in contrast to being unable to see beyond a range of current problems. Space to reflect on the future of teaching was generally seen as something further away from current realities by respondents in Austria, Flanders and Wales. While the survey prompt had a more open phrasing in the survey used in Malta, it is of note that over two-thirds of respondents perceive space for collective discussions on the future as a current strength or something that can be improved in the short term. Malta already benefits from a dedicated Directorate for Planning and Strategic Foresight within the Ministry of Education, Sport, Youth, Research and Innovation, which significantly impacted the response rate in this study (see Box 1.1). The survey responses would appear to reflect the systemic support for strategic foresight to support policy and practice.
Within the Maltese Ministry for Education, Sport, Youth, Research and Innovation (MEYR), the DPSF coordinates planning efforts and ensures that education policies and strategies are forward-thinking and aligned through strategic foresight. It leads several initiatives aimed at driving educational transformation and enabling success for all learners in Malta.
Through the Malta Education Foresight Forum (MEFF), it supports anticipatory governance and strategic foresight by creating spaces to anticipate future challenges while also addressing current pressures in the education system. MEFF brings together educators, policymakers, researchers and other stakeholders to co-create, test and refine education policies through continuous dialogue and feedback. It is organised around three interconnected components: a Steering Committee providing strategic direction, a Network of Experts (including CERI) contributing research and foresight expertise, and a Transformation Hub that enables experimentation and innovation among educators, students, families and the wider community through a sandbox approach. Together, these elements aim to support evidence-informed, participatory policymaking and help ensure that Malta’s education system remains adaptive and inclusive.
Source: Directorate for Planning and Strategic Foresight (2025[20]), Services, https://planningandstrategicforesight.gov.mt/en/services/ (accessed on 17 December 2025).
Note: Non-representative, voluntary survey sample.
Source: Material gathered as part as the OECD New professionalism and the Future of Teaching project (OECD, 2025[21]).
To underpin constructive and research-based discussions about the future of teaching, the NPFT project identified and summarised available research, from previous OECD work and other organisations. The project then proceeded to find directions that could provide indications to what the teaching profession would look like in the future. Four Working Papers explored the concept of teacher professional identity (Suarez and McGrath, 2022[22]); how teaching is situated within the changing concept of professionalism (Mezza, 2022[2]); cross-sectoral and interprofessional collaborations (Nilsson Brodén, 2022[6]); and what systematic connections could support work within schools (McGrath, 2023[5]). This section summarises the key lessons from this conceptual work.
The potential of a stronger focus on teacher professional identity
Teacher professional identity (TPI) comprises teachers’ beliefs, attitudes and motivations about their role. A focus on TPI provides agency for teachers to shape their ongoing professional work. TPI evolves for teachers during their professional lives and is shaped by their experiences and the context within which they work.
In addition to an individual professional identity, teachers can be influenced by and contribute to a collective professional identity, for example, shared with all colleagues at the school they work in. Collective professional identity refers to a shared understanding among a professional community, with a feeling of belonging and commitment to shared goals.
The concept of teacher professional identity (TPI) is a growing area of research. Definitions vary, but commonly refer to views, beliefs, emotions, motivations and attitudes that teachers have about their role (Karousiou, Hajisoteriou and Angelides, 2019[23]; Cordingley P., 2019[24]; Day, 2006[25]; Zhao, 2017[26]). TPI is dynamic and a constantly evolving concept for individuals and it is shaped by the way they process their experiences and context. TPI provides agency for teachers to shape their ongoing professional work (Suarez and McGrath, 2022[22]) and helps teachers align “who I am” with “what I do” (Mockler, 2020[27]). Developing strong professional identities, with the right support, can help teachers respond flexibly and act on change (Sachs, 2015[28]). Teachers’ commitment to teaching and their self-efficacy, or their belief about their own abilities to carry out their work, are an important part of their professional identity and have considerable influence on students’ performance and attitudes (Day, Elliot and Kington, 2005[29]; Galman, 2009[30]). When teachers express belief in their abilities, they also tend to feel greater well-being and job satisfaction (OECD, 2025[1]). Suarez and McGrath (2022[22]) present a model that links TPI with both professional and student learning outcomes.
Suarez and McGrath (2022[22]) argue that developing teacher understanding of TPI as it relates to their practice, including through system supports, like initial teacher education and continuing professional learning, can strengthen teacher growth. Recent research in Spain (Berbegal Vázquez et al., 2024[31]) underlines the tensions and vulnerability of TPI development in novice teachers, including the influence of their diverse pathways into teaching and their induction experiences, and calls for initial teacher education to better address these. Research in Austria and Finland (Maaranen et al., 2026[32]) on pre-service teachers similarly underlines how an individual’s commitment to teaching can vary and evolve during initial teacher education and induction depending on meaningful interactions with others and how initial experiences in schools align with their values. Although small scale studies, these point to the potential that a greater focus on teacher professional identity development during initial teacher education could have in ensuring that more qualified individuals choose to go into teaching.
Other important supports are within schools, including the support that teachers receive from their supervisor or mentors. This was already signalled as being an important support for TPI development by nearly six in ten lower secondary principals in 2018 (Suarez and McGrath, 2022[22]). There are benefits for both mentors and mentees: In 2024, mentoring other teachers is positively related with job satisfaction in about half of the education systems surveyed; having a mentor and participating in induction activities are also positively related with job satisfaction (OECD, 2025[1]). Professional relationships and collaboration among colleagues, including personal and collective reflections on practice all support TPI development. There are positive developments in this light. Between 2018 and 2024, time spent on teamwork and dialogue with colleagues has increased in 28 education systems, according to reports by lower secondary teachers (OECD, 2025[1]). Discussing the learning development of specific students with colleagues is associated with teachers having greater belief in their abilities (OECD, 2025[1]). This finding illustrates the potential of placing greater focus on TPI.
For policy makers, there are potential benefits from examining possible policy changes through the lens of TPI, recognising that implementation is likely to be more effective when the TPI and policy change ideas align (Suarez and McGrath, 2022[22]; Karousiou, Hajisoteriou and Angelides, 2019[23]). Recent data from TALIS 2024 show some improvement in teachers feeling their views are valued by policymakers (increases in around half the education systems since 2018), but still less than one in five teachers on average feel this is the case (OECD, 2025[1]). This is linked to a lack of teacher agency: only one in four teachers, on average, feel they can influence education policy in their country (OECD, 2025[1]). Giving more space to teacher voice in policy discussions would seem an important area to work on.
Suarez and McGrath (2022[22]) identify the need to further explore the potential of collective teacher professional identity. For example, as a way to open up thinking and strengthen teacher professionalism throughout a teacher’s career (Karousiou, Hajisoteriou and Angelides, 2019, p. 22[23]). This would focus on shared identities by different groups of teachers, for example, within common areas of teaching or in the same school. Recent findings from TALIS 2024 may provide a glimpse to the potential of forming a collective identity within a school: teachers working in schools with a higher share of students from ethnic or national minority groups, or Indigenous communities, report higher belief in their abilities across all aspects of multicultural pedagogy (OECD, 2025[1]).
Professionalism is evolving with more emphasis on professional collaboration
Connective professionalism recognises the complexity of contemporary working contexts and the need to interact with professionals within and across disciplines to solve problems. This augments traditional features of professionalism to reflect the growing importance of relational skills in professional life.
Professionalism refers to the conduct, qualities, and standards that characterise a profession or professional individual. It involves a combination of specialised knowledge and skills (cognitive dimension), ethical responsibility and service to the public good (ethical dimension), and adherence to legal, social, and organisational norms (social and legal dimension). It reflects a commitment to competence, integrity, accountability, and continuous development, and often includes traits like self-regulation, autonomy, and dedication to high standards of practice (Mezza, 2022[2]).
However, the concept of professionalism has been and is evolving for all disciplines, including teaching (Mezza, 2022[2]). The etymology of “profession” reveals the idea of restricted entry and traditionally male only. The more traditional concept of “protective professionalism” is usually associated with long-established, prestigious professions such as medicine, law, and academia where individuals work with a high degree of specialisation and autonomy. While traditional aspects of professionalism such as theory-informed skills, updating knowledge, specialisation and autonomy remain important, there is a move towards the more relational and interdependent concept of “connective professionalism” (Noordegraaf, 2020[33]). Professionalism in this case is anchored in interprofessional collaboration, both within and across disciplines. Kanon and Andersson (Kanon and Andersson, 2023[34]) demonstrate this change in practice across the public service in Sweden with increasing demands to resolve complex policy problems through cross-sectoral approaches. This changing professional focus is seen as a matter of survival with intensifying engagement in preventing problems rather than simply treating them (Kanon and Andersson, 2023[34]).
Situating teaching within evolving concepts of professionalism
As people consider their future at work, especially young people yet to choose a career field, there is value in situating teaching within changing concepts of being part of a profession and the key characteristics of contemporary and future definitions of a profession. By learning from other professions, the teaching profession can benefit from a greater focus on providing opportunities for specialisation, career progression, autonomy and status (Mezza, 2022[2]). Elements of professionalism where teaching might share expertise with other professions include collaboration, continuing professional learning, and engagement with research (Mezza, 2022[2]).
Status
Prestige, esteem and status are important features of a profession, and this is something that teaching could improve (Mezza, 2022[2]). OECD surveys of teachers since 2008 have revealed the phenomenon of teachers feeling that their profession is undervalued in society, while at the same time feeling generally valued and respected in their closest professional relationships. This has been reaffirmed in the most recent iteration of TALIS in 2024 (OECD, 2025[1]): on average, just over one in five teachers think their profession is valued by society. Again, this matters: teachers who feel their profession is valued by society are more than 10% less likely to consider leaving teaching within five years. In the context of the Netherlands, Rouw and Schokker (Mezza, 2022[2]) comment on the notable lack of public discussion on what it means to be a teacher. They argue this could help recognise teaching’s role in addressing great challenges in society and positively influence the status of the profession.
Autonomy
When looking at other sectors, autonomy is an important feature of a profession (Mezza, 2022[2]). OECD data show that teachers appreciate autonomy (OECD, 2019[35]; OECD, 2025[1]). TALIS 2024 (OECD, 2025[1]) shows that among different areas of decision making responsibility within schools, teachers in general have most autonomy over instructional decisions, such as designing lessons, selecting teaching methods and implementing the curriculum with flexibility, and rarely are involved with budget or staffing decisions. Teachers with higher autonomy over instructional decisions are more likely to report being able to tailor instruction to students’ needs, higher job satisfaction and lower stress levels. It is of note that greater autonomy is not found to be reserved for more experienced teachers (there is an association in only ten education systems). However, experienced teachers are more likely to participate in school management teams.
Specialisation and career progression
Specialisation refers to differentiation in the focus of professionals’ expertise. Ingersoll and Collins (2018[36]) illustrate this with, among others, the medical profession and the example that few employers would require heart doctors to deliver babies. Career progression refers to the advancement of the professional’s role, responsibilities, job title and rewards, justified by their experience, expertise and professional growth (Mezza, 2022[2]). Using a lifespan approach, considering the intersectionality of age and gender, (Choroszewicz and Adams, 2019[37]) can open up thinking about career specialisation at different stages which has benefits for policy and practice.
“But I’m just a teacher!” A challenge for teaching is to develop explicit options for career progression that allow teachers to specialise and develop while maintaining a classroom role, alongside options involving more managerial tasks (Mezza, 2022[2]). The teacher career progression system in Singapore offers three clear tracks (teaching, leadership and senior specialist) for encouraging advancement and career diversification (National Institute for School Leadership, 2019[38]). Within each track exist various positions and this “national ladder” provides a coherent framework. For example, within the teaching track, designed to support experts in pedagogy who stay in the classroom, there are four rungs on the ladder: senior teachers, lead teachers, master teachers and principal master teachers. But there is considerable room for school principals to determine the specific responsibilities according to the school’s needs. They and senior teachers are trained to spot and develop talent within their schools.
Continuing professional learning
One area where the teaching profession is well placed to lead the evolution in professionalism is continuing professional learning. Learning is at the core of teachers’ work and there appears to be much appetite for upskilling and learning more during their professional lives. The OECD’s survey on adult skills in 2023 shows that in most countries, and on average, teachers participate in training activities more than other adults (OECD, 2025[1]). It also shows that teachers are more likely to report unmet demand for training. In TALIS 2024 (OECD, 2025[1]), almost all teachers had participated in at least one professional development activity in the previous year. Subject knowledge and digital resources and tools were the most reported training activities (over seven in ten lower secondary teachers).
The appetite is there, but there remain some aspects to improve. Consistent with earlier surveys, in TALIS 2024 (OECD, 2025[1]) significant proportions of teachers report that training activities do not have a positive impact on their teaching (just over one in two teachers on average report this). Worryingly, there is a notable increase in the proportion of lower secondary teachers reporting a lack of time to participate in professional learning since 2018 (six in ten lower secondary teachers report they lack time). It is of note that younger teachers are seeking more education outside of the profession (one in four teachers under the age of 30 plan to leave teaching within the next five years to follow further education of training).
The potential for teachers to shape more meaningful collaboration
Meaningful collaborative activities support teachers’ work and are regularly reviewed to ensure they remain fit for purpose. To this end, teachers are involved in the development and design of collaborative activities. Importantly, teachers have the opportunity to develop and strengthen skills for interprofessional collaboration.
Collaboration has become more important for professions in general and this is identified as an aspect where teaching can lead the way (Mezza, 2022[2]). Nilsson Brodén (2022[6]) argues that while much of the research focuses on the benefits for students, a research gap to be considered more directly is the benefits for teachers and the conditions required for these collaborations to be successful. Teaching is a fundamentally relational profession and good relationships are important: when relationships are good with school principals, other teachers, parents and guardians and students, teachers tend to report higher well-being and job satisfaction (OECD, 2025[1]). According to teachers there are high levels of collegiality in their working lives and this is good for well-being: in 2024, on average eight in ten teachers report that they can rely on each other. One in four teachers report collaborating with parents and guardians to enrich student learning, at least monthly and in half of education systems surveyed these teachers tend to report being valued by parents and guardians (OECD, 2025[1]).
Strikingly, reports from teachers in TALIS 2018 (OECD, 2020[39]) showed professional collaboration as an attractive feature of working life for many teachers, with associations with both greater job satisfaction and lower levels of stress. This finding held for teachers in different cultural and governance contexts. But there was great variation in collaborative activities within schools, with only a minority of teachers reporting in-depth professional collaboration. Having strong collaboration skills can open opportunities to harness interprofessional or cross-sectoral work (Nilsson Brodén, 2022[6]).
Teacher reports in TALIS 2024 (OECD, 2025[1]) confirm that professional collaboration within schools is already well established in many ways and that there are benefits for working life. Collaborative activities with other teachers fall into two broad categories:
In-depth professional collaboration which includes team teaching (31% of lower secondary teachers, on average), providing feedback based on classroom observations (9%), engaging in joint activities across different classes (14%) and participating in collaborative professional learning.
Routine exchange and coordination for teaching which includes discussions about the learning development of specific students at least monthly (80%), exchanging teaching materials with colleagues monthly or more (45%) and working with other teachers to ensure common standards in evaluations for assessing student progress (41%).
Both structured, in-depth professional collaboration and more routine coordination work are associated with job satisfaction and teachers fulfilling lesson aims (OECD, 2025[1]).
The benefits of professional collaboration come through for many teachers in both 2018 and 2024. Is there potential to deepen collaborative working cultures within schools and to extend these to working with professionals in other sectors? This is already the reality for working life in schools, for example to support children’s well-being (OECD, 2024[40]), but does it suit teachers’ needs or can it be perceived as additional burden on their workloads? Collaborative work needs to be carefully structured in ways that are meaningful to those involved, especially for those working in schools. Nilsson Brodén (2022[6]) identified the potential of cross-sector collaborations to strengthen and support the teaching profession and developed five guiding principles to support developing the conditions for implementation to be effective. The five principles are: (1) the collaboration needs to be continuously warranted for everyone involved, (2) teachers and other stakeholders need to be involved in planning and developing the collaborative effort, (3) trust-building leadership is vital, (4) clarity facilitates collaboration, and (5) good interprofessional and cross-sector collaboration needs to be learnt (Nilsson Brodén, 2022[6]).
Teacher reports in 2024 (OECD, 2025[1]) show that teachers are actively shaping a collaborative profession. On average, eight in ten lower secondary teachers report initiating and leading collaboration with colleagues. This is also prominent at the primary level – even more so in half the countries. The picture is the same for teachers taking leadership roles in promoting professional learning communities. Interestingly, this is particularly reported by new recruits in eighteen of the countries surveyed. Again, this resonates with the attraction of connective professionalism as a contemporary way of working. It is of note that taking a leadership role is also strongly associated with higher belief in ability to teach.
Inspiring teachers to share and learn about next practice
While we cannot predict the future, a focus on next practice supports shaping the way we respond to the challenges and opportunities we envision. Next practice is a forward-looking process that benefits from a collaborative approach to create collective wisdom towards preferred near-futures.
McGrath (2023[5]) developed a framework to help teachers and others engage with research and ideas for next practice. This led to one of the key tools to support structured discussions in specific education systems: the ambition loops tool (see more below).
A well-known phrase in futures studies – originally coined by science fiction author William Gibson – is that “the future is here – it’s just not very evenly distributed” (NPR, 2022[41]). One person’s desired future can be another person’s present or could be viewed by someone else as inconceivable. This might hold truth for schools as well: some schools are able to put practices in place that other schools would consider unimaginable. A central question for this project therefore becomes: How can we help spread the future more evenly?
To explore this, a key conceptual focus has been “next practice,” understood in two complementary ways. First, next practice refers to novel and innovative approaches that are co-created to meet emerging needs (Lundy et al., 2021[42]). Second, it also refers to the critical reframing of existing practices to make them fit for evolving contexts. These dual definitions acknowledge that future-ready practice is as much about innovation as it is about reflection and adaptation (Zimmermann et al., 2021[43]).
The NPFT project designed a methodology to support structured discussions on the future of teaching, anchored in the research and conceptual findings. The methodology supports:
Co-constructing a shared vision on the future of teaching and teacher professionalism to guide policy development by collecting perspectives of multiple stakeholders to describe preferred futures for teaching and how they can support this.
Mapping out both actionable first steps and areas of long-term transformation for change to identify a path forward.
Using tools to consider diverse profiles of existing and future teachers and their professional needs.
Promoting well-functioning interprofessional and cross-sectoral collaborations.
The methodology has been applied in four education systems, each with specific research questions to explore with teachers and other stakeholders. As can be seen in Table 1.3, although phrased in different ways, the research questions in each study address the major themes of teacher professional identity, connective professionalism and support systems for teachers both within and external to schools.
The methodology includes four main activities: Research seminar; Stakeholder survey; Stakeholder workshops; Workshop with policy makers (Figure 1.1).
Participatory processes are a core feature of the methodology. The first one is a research seminar to gather input from researchers, teacher educators and others to help design the study tools (see more below). This was followed by a survey and in-person workshops that gather the perspectives of teachers and other education partners. This supports the development of more durable responses to a rapidly changing world by bringing together different perspectives to consider possibilities and alternatives (McGrath, 2023[5]). Elevating teacher voice and agency not only affirms the value of teachers’ work but also supports innovation and ownership of change (OECD, 2020[39]). Listening to those who are currently involved in education aims to generate ideas that are likely to have greater feasibility of being implemented (McIntyre, Novak and Cusick, 2010[45]).
Source: OECD (2024[16]), Constructing Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Flanders, https://doi.org/10.1787/b5bd68c4-en ; (OECD, 2025[44]), Constructing Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Austria, https://doi.org/10.1787/73545285-en; (OECD, 2025[17]), Constructing Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Wales, https://doi.org/10.1787/2e0ac4e6-en; (OECD, forthcoming[19]), Constructing Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Malta.
Participation in each study was voluntary. Ministries reached out to high level stakeholder groups to seek participants and used their own communication networks. The initial invitees could also forward the invitation to colleagues and other relevant stakeholders, using snowball sampling as an additional strategy. As a result, the size and composition of participant groups varied across systems.
The methodology also includes a final workshop with policy makers that recognises the need for an explicit process to strengthen the alignment between foresight approaches and policy (Robinson et al., 2021[15]). This provides an initial process to translate intelligence gained through the stakeholder workshops and their visions for the future of teaching into real-life decision making.
The methodology includes two innovative tools that can be used in education systems to support a constructive and future-focused discussion on the teaching profession. The first – ambition loops – deploys the research on teacher collaborative practices and the potential of ‘connective professionalism’. It helps study participants reflect on the connections and actions for different partners that they would prioritise to support their vision for the future of the teaching profession. The second – teacher personas – integrates international and local research on the teacher workforce and potential future recruits to allow study participants to consider the diverse needs and motivations of professionals at different career stages. It also helps participants test how attractive their vision for the future of the teaching profession would be for these different professionals. Both tools are presented below.
Source: Material gathered as part of the OECD New professionalism and the Future of Teaching project (OECD, 2025[21]).
Ambition loops: Mapping responsibility and setting goals
Ambition loops are bold, positive, research-based statements that can support dialogue among different actors. Ambition loops identify possible actions that different partners can focus on which can then be combined with the actions of other partners to generate positive, sustainable directions for the future (OECD, 2025[44]).
As teachers’ roles evolve and systems look beyond schools to create responses for solutions to complex challenges, the question of who supports teachers and how becomes more urgent. Partnerships with families, community organisations, health and social services, technology providers, research, cultural institutions, local employers and other members of society are now part of the daily reality of schools across OECD countries (OECD, 2025[46]). This shift deepens the relational demands of teaching that complement core knowledge and teaching skills. A teacher today is not only expected to master pedagogy, but “understands that education is a shared responsibility of home, school and community and knows how to work effectively with students, family, community partners and colleagues” (Epstein, 2018[47]).
While these expectations can increase both the complexity and the workload of the profession, partnerships can also broaden the resources available to teachers and expand the collective capacity around schools. Research increasingly points to the value of looking beyond bilateral relationships and exploring how stakeholder groups can reinforce one another through coordinated action (Malmberg-Heimonen, Tøge and Akhtar, 2023[48]; McGrath, 2023[5]). The strengthened focus on partnerships also provides opportunities to make connections based on teachers’ interests and passions, providing opportunities for career specialisation or ”job crafting” (Demerouti, 2025[49]; Mezza, 2022[2]). Working with diverse partners is the educational reality in many schools within OECD countries already (OECD, 2025[46]). The question then becomes: What systematic connections should schools have with their surrounding ecosystem to support teachers’ work?
To explore this question, the NPFT project developed an Ambition loops tool (McGrath, 2023[5]), which includes a mapping of possible connections and allows teachers and other stakeholders to consider which would be priority for the future of teaching in their context. The concept of ‘loops’ refers to the fact that the set of actions taken by teachers and other partners could collectively reinforce each other to help transform policy and practice over the medium term (see Box 1.2). It is a structured tool that opens space for imaginative, forward-looking collaborations grounded in research.
Ambition loops were originally developed in the climate field to describe how bold leadership from one actor (e.g. business) can stimulate bold action from another (e.g. governments), creating positive feedback loops that accelerate progress (Metzger et al., 2018[50]; McGrath, 2023[5]). The premise behind ambition loops is that clarity, confidence and long-term direction from one partner can unlock ambition in others, enabling coalitions that would not emerge through top-down policymaking alone.
Ambition loops align with a broader wave of participatory and anticipatory approaches to policymaking to address contemporary and socially divisive issues (OECD, 2022[51]). Through their framing in forward-looking language, they can also address a common barrier in education reform: Stakeholders’ tendency to fall back on their own past experiences – such as of schooling –, limiting their ability to envision alternatives (McGrath, 2023[5]).
In education, ambition loops can help overcome this by providing structured “What if…” provocations. They invite stakeholders to articulate future-facing commitments that, if pursued together, could transform practice and policy. These shared commitments help identify points of consensus and tension, and offer stepping stones for designing preferred future scenarios.
Ambition loops therefore serve two purposes: They are, first, a collection of future visions and related ambitions that are anchored in research and ideas for next practice (McGrath, 2023[5]),. Second, they provide a framework for collective dialogue about the future of teaching and the ecosystems that surround it.
An illustration of how the ambition loops tool is used
In this section, we illustrate how the NPFT project designed and used the ambition loops tool with examples from the study in Malta (OECD, forthcoming[19]).
Step 1: Adapting the ambition loops tool to the local context and research questions
The NPFT project developed a standard set of ambition loops, integrating international research. In each study within a specific education system, the project held a research seminar and bilateral interviews to augment the standard research base with studies from the specific education system.
First, it was necessary to map the relevant stakeholders within the given system, both those who already influence education and those who could influence it in the future, and the relationships that could be reframed to benefit teachers’ work (McGrath, 2023[5]). For the system study in Malta, we identified the following stakeholders: Teachers, other educators (supply teachers and learning support educators), leadership within schools (school heads and deputy heads), school management (external to the school), policy makers, higher education partners, and community partners.
Second, we identified areas where shared ambition could strengthen teachers’ work. The standard set of ambition loops was adapted and augmented to align with system-specific research questions that guided each study. This ensured that the ambition loops were contextualised and, at the same time, this process tested and strengthened the standard set of ambition loops available. In Malta, five thematic areas emerged: Educator empowerment and well-being; school–community partnerships; teacher professional identity; broader societal partnerships; and equity and inclusion.
Organising ambition statements into thematic areas helps cluster similar ideas that require complementary actions from different actors (see Figure 1.2 for an example of the thematic area ‘broader societal partnerships’). Each statement highlights a concrete idea for action and identifies the actor(s) that are best positioned to lead it. Every statement is also accompanied by a synthesis of relevant international and local research to ground the ambition in evidence.
Step 2: Assessing system priorities and readiness
Each study included a survey on ambitions for the future of teaching. The set of ambitions included roles for different actors within the system, including teachers. For each suggested ambition, respondents were asked to consider both: how important is each ambition (not important, less important, very important)? And also, what is the level of change required to achieve this ambition – is the ambition already a strength in the system, an area needing improvement, or a long-term transformation?
The study in Malta (OECD, forthcoming[19]) included a survey with a total of 2 187 respondents, the majority of which were practitioners: 1 003 (46%) were teachers, and 597 (27%) were learning support educators (LSEs). Figure 1.2 shows the ambition statements from the thematic area on broader societal partnerships. It shows the nature of ambition statements forming a set of possible actions that together contribute to an overarching ambition, in this case “What if… we value external expertise from across society to broaden learning experiences in school?”. It also shows that the suggested ambitions generally received strong support. The two related directly to teachers received the strongest support. They were also judged to have the strongest foundation to build on, with at least one in five respondents indicating it is already a strength in the system.
The responses were disaggregated by both respondent roles (including teachers, LSEs, heads of school, deputy heads of school, parents, school management [external to the school], and ministry staff) and school sectors, if applicable (public, church and independent). This revealed that some groups were particularly supportive of certain ambitions. For example, for the three ambition statements with an asterisk in Figure 1.2, the respondents from the public and independent sectors seemed to think this a more pressing need; and this was also the case for learning support educators.
The ambition loop survey overall allowed the study not only to measure appetite for change but also to detect where stakeholders saw existing strengths or gaps.
What if… we value external expertise from across society to broaden learning experiences in school?
Note: The survey asked respondents to judge the level of change required to achieve the specific ambition. They could answer that it was already a strength in the system, that it would require short-term improvement (to improve) or that it would require longer-term planning (to transform). Responses to the survey were collected on a voluntary basis. A total of 2 187 stakeholders participated in the survey. Ambition statements with a star (*) were prioritised by participants during the in-person workshops workshop in Malta.
Source: (OECD, forthcoming[19]), Constructing Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Malta.
Step 3: Prioritising ambitions for the future of teaching and developing future scenarios
Each study included one or two workshops with teachers and other stakeholders. Participants worked with the survey results (each participant could allocate 10 “dots” to the set of ambition statements) to identify the most resonant and urgent ideas. The three ambition statements marked with an asterisk in Figure 1.2 for example, were among the most popular ambition statements identified in Malta.
These priorities became the entry point for collaborative scenario building in working groups. Participants selected specific ambitions to help develop their preferred scenario for the future of teaching. The combination of ambition statements supported building positive feedback loops to create momentum within each scenario.
Step 4: Drafting scenarios for the future of teaching
The OECD project team then worked with the scenarios developed by teachers and other stakeholders and used the research underlying their selected ambition statements (for example see Box 1.3) to draft the scenario for publication. In the study in Malta, five scenarios were developed, three of which directly drew on the ambition statements for broader societal partnerships in Figure 1.2. “Policymakers, educators and higher education develop partnerships for teachers to further develop their interests and expertise” fed into a preferred future scenario focusing on empowering leadership and creating attractive teaching careers. “Educators should be equipped with collaboration skills to work effectively across sectors and professions” featured strongly in a scenario on pedagogical innovation and student empowerment.
This box shows the supporting research for the ambition statement “Partners within the broader societal sector collaborate with schools to extend learning opportunities outside school buildings”.
Schools that actively engage with families and the wider community can create rich learning environments that support both student success and societal cohesion (Gatt, 2010[52]). Leadership within schools plays a critical role in fostering these connections, with policy makers supporting school leaders to develop and implement effective partnership strategies (Gu, 2021[53]; Epstein, 2021[54]; Ryan, 2021[55]). Schools with well-developed family engagement programmes can help parents build confidence and skills, ultimately benefiting student learning (ESTYN, 2020[56]).
Beyond direct parental involvement, schools can serve as a bridge between formal education and wider societal learning opportunities. Teachers, play a crucial role in connecting students to both formal and informal learning settings (Villalba-García, 2021[57]; El Bedewy, Lavicza and Lyublinskaya, n.d.[58]). This approach aligns with the idea of a “learning city”, where schools function as hubs within a broader network of educational institutions, including museums, galleries, and science centres (Facer and Buchczyk, 2019[59]). By fostering such connections, teachers can help students see learning as a lifelong endeavour, extending beyond the classroom and into the broader world. Partnerships with wider societal sectors provide opportunities to extend learning beyond school buildings. These collaborations can create rich, interest-driven learning environments that enhance student engagement and deepen their understanding of complex topics (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020[60]).
In Malta, this approach is reflected in several recent initiatives. The Family–Community–School Link (FCSL) programme, introduced as part of the Education Ministry’s Early Leaving from Education and Training Strategy, strengthens collaboration between schools, families and community organisations to provide more coherent and holistic support for students (Directorate for Planning and Strategic Foresight, 2025[20]). Early evidence from the programme points to increased parental engagement through improved parent–teacher communication, targeted outreach for families of children with disabilities and learning difficulties, reduced absenteeism through collaboration with psycho-social services, and community-based training programmes on well-being, health and digital skills that have reached more than 150 parents since early 2025 (Public Service Malta, 2025[61]). Research conducted in Malta has similarly shown that sustained collaboration between schools, families and community partners can contribute to improved educational outcomes, particularly in socio-economically disadvantaged contexts (Gatt, 2010[52]).
Source: Adapted from McGrath, J. (2023), "What systematic connections should we have around schools to support the work of teachers?: Global lessons and the potential of ambition loops", OECD Education Working Papers, No. 296, https://doi.org/10.1787/77de597c-en.
And “Partners within broader society collaborate with schools to extend learning opportunities outside of school buildings” was a priority for a scenario that emphasised community-based learning outside of the school.
Teacher personas: Towards a deeper understanding of the teaching workforce
Teacher personas are evidence-informed, life-like characters that allow participants to consider diverse profiles of existing and future teachers. They are tailored to each system's context and offer a deeper understanding of the teaching workforce, including teachers’ professional needs, ambitions, struggles and career development aspirations. They can help stress test visions and scenarios for the future of teaching by considering how different personas would react.
Accounting for the lived experiences, opinions, ambitions, and motivations of teachers can significantly increase the quality and value of education policy. In addition, including teachers in the conversation enhances the perceived legitimacy of policy reforms and fosters a sense of ownership that can be critical for the durability and effectiveness of proposed policies and their implementation. Empowering teachers to influence the decisions that shape their professional lives is, therefore, indispensable (OECD, 2019[62]).
While ambition loops reveal what a system aspires to become and who can facilitate that change, they cannot clearly show whether those futures would align with the diverse needs of teachers.
Personas are life-like characters that are built on combined patterns of potential or real users’ motivation, behaviours, and experiences when using products, usually synthesised into a set of user archetypes (Huynh et al., 2021[63]; Nilsson Brodén, 2022[6]). With the onset of Personal Computers (PCs) in the early 1990s, the need arose for user-friendly programming that would allow the new digital products to be used by larger audiences. This in turn led to thinking about the design of digital products, which was explored by American software designer and programmer Alan Cooper (Patton, 2008[64]; Cooper, 1995[65]). One of the tools Cooper developed were ‘Personas’, which he described as follows:
“Personas provide us with a precise way of thinking and communicating about how groups of users behave, how they think, what they want to accomplish, and why. Personas are not real people, but they are assembled from the behaviours and motivations of the many actual users we encounter in our research. In other words, personas are composite archetypes based on behaviour patterns uncovered during the course of our research [...]. By using personas, we can develop an understanding of our users’ goals in specific contexts – a critical tool for ideating and validating design concepts “ (Cooper et al., 2014, p. 66[66]).
Personas were developed to help determine what a product should look like and how it should perform. They can facilitate communication with stakeholders such as designers, build consensus and commitment, measure the effectiveness of a product or action, and contribute to shared knowledge. To an ample degree, these goals align with those of policy makers.
In fact, Cooper (2014[66]) further argues that personas can help avoid certain design pitfalls that are recognisable from an (educational) policy perspective. First, it can be challenging to hear all voices, and interpreting opinions and presuppositions often reflects those who are the loudest at the negotiating table. Second, personas can correct a ‘self-referential’ (Cooper et al., 2014, p. 65[66]) design that can result in one-way policy choices. Third, personas can highlight outliers (or edge cases, as Cooper calls them); situations that might happen, but not in most cases (Cooper, 1995[65]; Cooper et al., 2014[66]). In recent years, the use of personas in the realm of education has been explored as a way of better identifying both teacher and student needs in research (Weinhandl et al., 2022[67]; Nilsson Brodén, 2022[6]).
Since personas are intentionally and explicitly not meant to be real people, yet reflect attitudes, traits and behaviours, the risk of creating stereotypes is real. Personas should mirror objective observations and data, providing guidelines on characterisation, rather than prescribing biases and assumptions.
Research that has brought the concept of personas into the realm of education underlines that personas should not just be ‘created’ from scratch by policy makers. A degree of structural argumentation and reasoning is important if personas are to be taken seriously as a tool (Weinhandl et al., 2023[68]; Madsen et al., 2014[69]; Huynh et al., 2021[63]; Nilsson Brodén, 2022[6]; Weinhandl et al., 2022[67]).
Teachers experience policy, reform and innovation differently depending on their backgrounds, motivations, working conditions and identities. A future that appears ambitious and promising at system level may feel misaligned or burdensome when viewed from the standpoint of specific groups of teachers. To give those groups a voice, the project introduced a second tool: Teacher personas (Nilsson Brodén, 2022[6]). This was inspired by an approach originally used in software design (see Box 1.4).
How to design Teacher Personas
The project opted for a structured process to build a basis for the teacher personas. In a first step, this process included locating different publicly available datasets and involving experts, teachers and policy makers to develop a methodological approach for the creation of personas. The OECD’s unique status in managing different large-scale international research projects placed the project in a good position to design teacher personas based on quantitative data as a start. In addition, OECD publications such as the Employment Outlook (OECD, 2025[8]), Migration Outlook (OECD, 2024[70]), and Pensions Outlook (OECD, 2024[71]) provide valuable data. Research for the ambition loops tool also resulted in a large database of international research that proved useful for the development of the personas.
When working with the education systems that engaged in the research project, another set of information was added. National databases as well as national research on topics that ranged from labour market statistics to student interviews were used to develop national teacher personas. Finally – and crucially –, academics, teachers, policy makers and relevant stakeholders from each education system were involved during different stages of the studies in the systems.
Step 1: Choosing the right teacher personas
The daily life of teachers all around the world demonstrates many similarities and creating internationally applicable teacher personas could be a possibility. Within the setting of a specific education system however, the development of teacher personas can provide more specificity and guidance. The project therefore chose to create a set of system-specific teacher personas for each of the participating education systems.
In collaboration with education policy makers from each of the systems, relevant subgroups within the teacher workforce were identified. Some of these subgroups were large and contrasting cohorts like starting and experienced teachers or primary and secondary school teachers. Other groups were smaller subcategories, reflecting the education system's focus on specific areas, such as second-career teachers, a drive for more ethnic diversity in the teacher workforce or teachers in leadership roles. Finally, a subgroup was created to provoke thinking beyond the current teacher workforce: Teachers from the future, which were constructed by analysing the characteristics of current teacher students, data on children and (aspects of) generational research1.
The data and research used for the actual development for teacher personas in the various education systems was in part provided during online research seminars, which allowed the OECD to interact directly with researchers and other experts from the education systems the team worked with. Input was provided to think about several developments within society, schools, and the teacher workforce to consider when constructing the personas.
These discussions resulted in a ‘longlist’ of possible personas ideas to be studied. Table 1.4 provides an example overview of the longlist that was constructed in preparation of the online research seminar in Flanders and includes examples of some of the motivations and arguments that were mentioned during the online research seminar, and the personas which were ultimately selected to construct further.
Note: The shortlist was restricted to six teacher personas for manageability in their use. The shortlisted teacher personas sought to cover as many ideas from the longlist as possible. The shortlist was subsequently selected by the OECD team and the team from the ministry.
Source: OECD (2024[16]), Constructing Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Flanders, https://doi.org/10.1787/b5bd68c4-en.
Step 2: Embracing contradictions – developing pairs of teacher personas
Although the goal of creating teacher subgroups is to enhance coherence within each group, nuances and even contradictions inevitably persist. For instance, two primary school teachers with comparable levels of experience may have significantly different preferences for professional development or approaches to well-being. Developing a persona pair within each subgroup offers room to reflect on that complexity. This can be especially valuable for policies that only target a certain subgroup, such as second-career teachers.
Step 3: Selecting and developing indicator categories
When all the different data and research was collected and discussed with experts during the research phase, a next step was taken to select and develop a range of indicators that were deemed relevant for the teacher personas construction in each system.
Agreeing on indicators allowed to structure the available data and research, and to construct the personas following the same scaffold, increasing coherence and comparability. It further highlighted information gaps, and helped tracking how much information is available on each subgroup. Some of the indicators were used for all the persona pairs across all three studies (like gender, motivation or collaboration), some were system-specific (perceptions on salary or autonomy), and some were persona-specific (like leadership roles or relationships with parents).
Step 4: Giving the personas a name and a voice
What makes personas powerful is their life-like quality. We used them intentionally to bring teachers’ voices into the work not only through data, but also through storytelling.
In each of the reports, the persona pairs were assigned fictional faces and provided with a general introductory quote. Their descriptions were drafted in a narrative fashion, with all elements linked to research in bold, followed by a selection of highlighted categories.
The categories were highlighted because they were of specific relevance to the context, character, or feature of the described persona. An overview of the other categories that were derived and the research supporting these was provided in the annex of each report.
Throughout the reports, the personas were further captured in quotes commenting on the scenarios that were developed in each study (see Infographic 3.2).
Persona illustration: how Jose might comment an aspect of a future scenario emphasising shared responsibility
Step 5: Testing and refining the personas
In Flanders, Austria and Malta, a total of six sets of two personas were constructed. In Wales, seven persona pairs were constructed. The sets of personas were presented to teachers, school leaders and ministry experts, who had the opportunity to make suggestions to edit them.
Personas in practice: inspiring and stress-testing preferred future scenarios
Personas were partly used as an inspiration for creating future scenarios in the stakeholder workshop – e.g., guided by questions like “What does Jose, an experienced primary teacher, struggle with? What does she need?”. More importantly, however, the OECD team worked with a small team from the Ministry to further strengthen the scenarios after the stakeholder workshops. A key focus of these sessions was using the teacher personas to evaluate the relative benefits of each constructed scenario for different teacher personas, as well as to explore actionable strategies for implementing the scenarios. To facilitate this, participants were asked to position the personas on a positive-negative scale and provide a rationale for their placement.
Learning from the personas…
Teacher personas provide a unique lens to better understand and compare education systems. What lessons can we draw from their creation and use in the Flemish, Welsh and Austrian contexts? How do comparisons between these personas highlight opportunities for growth?
…throughout the project
Constructing teacher personas required a deep-dive into the research and data of each system-specific teacher workforce. Collecting details about teachers such as their characteristics, motivations, perceptions, aspirations, and well-being further informed thinking about the strengths and weaknesses of each respective education system as a whole and put forth pressing issues that could later be addressed in the preferred future scenarios.
Later, the personas were at the core of stress-testing and fine-tuning the scenarios. Workshop participants appreciated the tool, which encouraged them to open their minds, adopt fictional roles and engage in informed storytelling, fostering discussions that were more empathetic and grounded than purely academic or policy debates. From this perspective, the personas were a crucial element across the three studies, ensuring a life-like approach that centred around real teachers’ experiences and welcomed fresh ideas.
…in policy making beyond the project
Collecting information for constructing the personas resulted in what could be called a database of each system-specific teacher workforce. The organisation of indicators for different persona subgroups allows to read this database in two ways. First, it serves as a “fact sheet” about specific subgroups. For instance, policy makers involved in designing teacher training might want to learn about the demographics, motivations, and difficulties that starting teachers face. Second, the database allows comparing subgroups along a specific indicator, such as collaboration. How much, and in which ways, do urban teachers collaborate compared to their colleagues in rural schools? Are there age or gender differences? These insights uncover opportunities to strengthen policies and practices both within and across systems.
Within systems, differences between personas can increase the sensibility around different policy outcomes for different teacher cohorts. A strategy to bolster teacher autonomy might, for instance, benefit experienced teachers, but risk overwhelming starting teachers, who are rather looking for stability and guidance and already face long working hours (Kelchtermans and Ballet, 2002[72]; Shanks et al., 2022[73]; Nairz-Wirth, Feldmann and Lehner, 2023[74]). This knowledge can help shape policies that meet the diverging needs of teachers, like introducing professional development opportunities for experienced teachers to become mentors for less experienced colleagues seeking deeper forms of support (Meyer, Richter and Kempert, 2024[75]; Helm et al., 2024[76]).
Comparing the teacher personas across systems can help identifying opportunities for countries to learn from each other by mapping out system-specific strengths and weaknesses (see Table 1.5).
Source: Material gathered as part as the OECD New professionalism and the Future of Teaching project (OECD, 2025[21]).
Other OECD work since has engaged with personas to illustrate possible future developments influencing stakeholders in education (OECD, 2025[3]) and introducing the TALIS results (OECD, 2025[1]). More widespread use could illustrate personas are indeed a “user-friendly” tool for policy makers themselves, but that teacher personas offer more than an appealing data illustration. They serve as powerful tools for understanding the needs of diverse teacher groups, inspiring and testing policies, and identifying collaboration opportunities across education systems. When used effectively, they help address challenges and build on strengths, highlight opportunities for mutual learning between systems, and create more supportive environments for teachers.
The following sections build on this methodological foundation to present the study’s findings, deepen the analysis through expert perspectives, and synthesise what these insights mean for the future of teaching and teacher professionalism.
Section 2 presents the findings from the future-of-teaching studies conducted in Flanders, Austria and Wales. It summarises findings from the case studies through a cross-case analysis. The analysis leads to an innovative framework comprising Aspirations for the Future of Teaching and Enablers of Change.
Section 3 builds on the themes that emerged most prominently across the studies and the many conversations held with policy makers, teacher representatives and local partners. To deepen the analysis, the project convened international experts whose work aligns closely with the areas stakeholders cared about most – systemic school transformation and new teacher identities, teacher well-being, career pathways and professional growth, AI and technology, and innovation in teaching and learning. Their contributions provide a forward-looking perspective on how the profession may evolve over the next 10–20 years.
Section 4 brings the report together by offering an integrated analysis of the evolving nature of teacher professionalism. Drawing on evidence from TALIS 2024, the three system studies and the expert insights, it outlines a vision of professionalism that is increasingly collaborative, relational and adaptive.
References
[12] Amsler, S. and K. Facer (2017), “Contesting anticipatory regimes in education: exploring alternative educational orientations to the future”, Futures, Vol. 94, pp. 6-14, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FUTURES.2017.01.001.
[36] Ballantine, S. (ed.) (2018), The status of teaching as a profession, Pine Forge Press/Sage Publications.
[31] Berbegal Vázquez, A. et al. (2024), “Becoming a secondary school teacher: Keys to a meaningful professional identity”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 148, p. 104697, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104697.
[37] Choroszewicz, M. and T. Adams (eds.) (2019), Gender, Age and Inequality in the Professions, Routledge, New York : Routledge, 2019. | Series: Routledge studies in gender and organizations, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351052467.
[65] Cooper, A. (1995), About face: The essentials of user interface design, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.5555/526507 (accessed on 28 August 2025).
[66] Cooper, A. et al. (2014), About Face: The essentials of Interaction Design, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., https://fall14se.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/alan-cooper-robert-reimann-david-cronin-christopher-noessel-about-face_-the-essentials-of-interaction-design-wiley-2014.pdf (accessed on 28 August 2025).
[24] Cordingley P., E. (2019), Constructing teachers’ professional identities, Education International, https://www.ei-ie.org/en/item/25683:constructing-teachers-professional-identities (accessed on 18 December 2025).
[60] Darling-Hammond, L. et al. (2020), “Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development”, Applied Developmental Science, Vol. 24/2, pp. 97-140, https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791.
[25] Day, C. (2006), “The personal and professional selves of teachers: Stable and unstable identities”, British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 32/4, pp. 601-616.
[29] Day, C., B. Elliot and A. Kington (2005), “Reform, standards and teacher identity: Challenges of sustaining commitment”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 21/5, pp. 563-577, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.03.001.
[49] Demerouti, E. (2025), “Balancing Job Demands and Resources: Strategies for Teacher Well-Being and Performance”, in OECD (ed.), New Professionalism and the Future of Teaching, OECD Publishing, Paris.
[20] Directorate for Planning and Strategic Foresight (2025), Services, https://planningandstrategicforesight.gov.mt/en/services/ (accessed on 17 December 2025).
[58] El Bedewy, S., Z. Lavicza and I. Lyublinskaya (n.d.), “STEAM practices connecting mathematics, arts, architecture, culture and history in a non-formal learning environment of a museum”, Journal of Mathematics and the Arts, doi: 10.1080/17513472.2024.2321563, pp. 1-34, https://doi.org/10.1080/17513472.2024.2321563.
[54] Epstein, J. (2021), The Nordic Model of Education and Home-School Relations, AERA Annual Meeting Family, School, Community Partnerships SIG.
[47] Epstein, J. (2018), “School, family, and community partnerships in teachers’ professional work”, Journal of Education for Teaching, Vol. 44/3, pp. 397-406, https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2018.1465669.
[56] ESTYN (2020), Community schools: families and communities at the heart of school life, https://www.estyn.gov.wales/system/files/2021-08/Community%2520Schools%2520en.pdf (accessed on 26 May 2026).
[59] Facer, K. and M. Buchczyk (2019), “Towards a research agenda for the ‘actually existing’ Learning City”, Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 45/2, pp. 151-167, https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2018.1551990.
[30] Galman, S. (2009), “Doth the lady protest too much? Pre-service teachers and the experience of dissonance as a catalyst for development”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 25/3, pp. 468-481, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.08.002.
[52] Gatt, S. (2010), “The role of the Community in enhancing learning”, Journal of Educational Sciences 12(2), https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/19203 (accessed on 26 May 2026).
[53] Gu, L. (2021), Inclusion, Exclusion, or Segregation: Parents’ Position in Education in Sweden, AERA SIG-Family, School, Community Partnerships Paper and Symposium Sessions.
[76] Helm, C. et al. (2024), “Satisfaction and general well-being of Austrian student teachers who enter the teaching profession while still studying”, European Journal of Teacher Education, pp. 1-25, https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2024.2433586.
[14] Hsu, L. (2020), “Visioning the future: Evaluating learning outcomes and impacts of futures-oriented education”, Journal of Futures Studies, Vol. 24/4, pp. 103-116, https://jfsdigital.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/11-Chen-Visioning-the-Future-ED-8-2.pdf (accessed on 26 May 2026).
[63] Huynh, T. et al. (2021), “Building personas from phenomenography: a method for user-centered design in education”, Information and Learning Sciences, Vol. 122/11/12, pp. 689-708, https://doi.org/10.1108/ils-12-2020-0256.
[34] Kanon, M. and T. Andersson (2023), “Working on connective professionalism: What cross-sector strategists in Swedish public organizations do to develop connectivity in addressing ‘wicked’ policy problems”, Journal of Professions and Organization, Vol. 10/1, pp. 50-64, https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joac020.
[23] Karousiou, C., C. Hajisoteriou and P. Angelides (2019), “Teachers’ professional identity in super-diverse school settings: Teachers as agents of intercultural education”, Teachers and teaching, Vol. 25/2, pp. 240-258, https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2018.1544121.
[72] Kelchtermans, G. and K. Ballet (2002), “The micropolitics of teacher induction. A narrative-biographical study on teacher socialisation”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 18/1, pp. 105-120, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0742-051x(01)00053-1.
[42] Lundy, J. et al. (2021), “Utilising a capability maturity model to leverage inclusion and diversity in public sector organisations”, Australian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 80/4, pp. 1032-1045, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12521.
[32] Maaranen, K. et al. (2026), “Pre-service teachers’ commitment to teaching: Cases of complex paths from Finland and Austria”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 171, p. 105316, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2025.105316.
[69] Madsen, A. et al. (2014), Personas as a Powerful Methodology to Design Targeted Professional Development Resources, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1408.1125 (accessed on 14 January 2025).
[48] Malmberg-Heimonen, I., A. Tøge and S. Akhtar (2023), “Improving interprofessional collaboration in schools: A cluster-randomized study evaluating the effectiveness of the LOG model on collaboration practices”, Journal of Interprofessional Care, Vol. 39/1, pp. 40-47, https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2022.2149717.
[5] McGrath, J. (2023), “What systematic connections should we have around schools to support the work of teachers?: Global lessons and the potential of ambition loops”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 296, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/77de597c-en.
[45] McIntyre, S., I. Novak and A. Cusick (2010), “Consensus research priorities for cerebral palsy: a Delphi survey of consumers, researchers, and clinicians”, Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, Vol. 52/3, pp. 270-275, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03358.x.
[50] Metzger, E. et al. (2018), The Ambition Loop: How Business and Government Can Advance Policies That Fast Track Zero-Carbon Economic Growth., https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5bbe243651f4d40801af46d5/t/5c00266c0e2e728a28cee091/1543513751309/The-Ambition-Loop.pdf (accessed on 26 May 2026).
[75] Meyer, A., E. Richter and S. Kempert (2024), “Student teachers as in-service teachers in schools: The moderating effect of social support in the relationship between student teachers’ instructional activities and their work-related stress”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 146, p. 104633, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104633.
[2] Mezza, A. (2022), “Reinforcing and innovating teacher professionalism: Learning from other professions”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 276, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/117a675c-en.
[27] Mockler, N. (2020), “Navigating professional identity as a teacher of history”, in Historical Thinking for History Teachers, Routledge, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003115977-27.
[74] Nairz-Wirth, E., K. Feldmann and S. Lehner (2023), Praxisschock? - Eine qualitative Studie zum Berufseinstieg von Lehrerinnen und Lehrern [A shock when starting out? – A qualitative study on teachers’ entry into the profession], https://wien.arbeiterkammer.at/interessenvertretung/bildung/Berufseinstieg_Lehrerin_2023.pdf (accessed on 26 May 2026).
[38] National Institute for School Leadership (2019), National Institute for School Leadership, https://documents.ncsl.org/wwwncsl/Education/Study-Group/NISLSingapore%27sCareerLadderSystem.pdf (accessed on 18 December 2025).
[6] Nilsson Brodén, D. (2022), “Cross-sector and interprofessional collaborations: A powerful tool for the teaching profession?”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 283, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7144c6ac-en.
[33] Noordegraaf, M. (2020), “Protective or connective professionalism? How connected professionals can (still) act as autonomous and authoritative experts”, Journal of Professions and Organization, Vol. 7/2, pp. 205-223, https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joaa011.
[41] NPR (2022), “The Science in Science Fiction”, in Talk of the Nation, https://www.npr.org/2018/10/22/1067220/the-science-in-science-fiction (accessed on 5 March 2025).
[44] OECD (2025), Constructing Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Austria, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/73545285-en.
[17] OECD (2025), Constructing Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Wales, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2e0ac4e6-en.
[18] OECD (2025), Creating Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Austria, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/73545285-en.
[7] OECD (2025), Education at a Glance 2025: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1c0d9c79-en.
[21] OECD (2025), OECD CERI New professionalism and the future of teaching, https://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/new-professionalism-future-of-teaching.htm, https://www.oecd.org/en/about/projects/new-professionalism-and-the-future-of-teaching.html (accessed on 27 May 2025).
[8] OECD (2025), OECD Employment Outlook 2025: Can We Get Through the Demographic Crunch?, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/194a947b-en.
[1] OECD (2025), Results from TALIS 2024: The State of Teaching, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/90df6235-en.
[46] OECD (2025), “School partnerships addressing child well-being and digital technology”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, No. 114, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3c946a99-en.
[3] OECD (2025), Trends Shaping Education 2025, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ee6587fd-en.
[16] OECD (2024), Constructing Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Flanders, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b5bd68c4-en.
[9] OECD (2024), Education Policy Outlook 2024: Reshaping Teaching into a Thriving Profession from ABCs to AI, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/dd5140e4-en.
[70] OECD (2024), International Migration Outlook 2024, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/50b0353e-en.
[71] OECD (2024), OECD Pensions Outlook 2024: Improving Asset-backed Pensions for Better Retirement Outcomes and More Resilient Pension Systems, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/51510909-en.
[40] OECD (2024), What Does Child Empowerment Mean Today?: Implications for Education and Well-being, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8f80ce38-en.
[51] OECD (2022), Trends Shaping Education 2022, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6ae8771a-en.
[11] OECD (2021), Global Scenarios 2035: Exploring Implications for the Future of Global Collaboration and the OECD, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/df7ebc33-en.
[10] OECD (2020), Back to the Future of Education: Four OECD Scenarios for Schooling, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/178ef527-en.
[39] OECD (2020), TALIS 2018 Results (Volume II): Teachers and School Leaders as Valued Professionals, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/19cf08df-en.
[35] OECD (2019), TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en.
[62] OECD (2019), Working and Learning Together: Rethinking Human Resource Policies for Schools, OECD Reviews of School Resources, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b7aaf050-en.
[19] OECD (forthcoming), Constructing Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Malta, OECD.
[64] Patton, J. (2008), “A Conversation with Alan Cooper: The Origin of Interaction Design”, IEEE Software, Vol. 25/6, pp. 15-17, https://doi.org/10.1109/ms.2008.142.
[61] Public Service Malta (2025), Transforming Connections: Bridging Families, Communities, and Schools for Student Success, https://mychild.gov.mt/en/service/mc-family-community-school-link-0 (accessed on 18 December 2025).
[4] Randall, G. and D. Kindiak (2008), “Deprofessionalization or Postprofessionalization? Reflections on the State of Social Work as a Profession”, Social Work in Health Care, Vol. 47/4, pp. 341-354, https://doi.org/10.1080/00981380802173855.
[15] Robinson, D. et al. (2021), “Policy lensing of future-oriented strategic intelligence: An experiment connecting foresight with decision making contexts”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 169, p. 120803, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120803.
[77] Rudolph, C. et al. (2020), “Generations and Generational Differences: Debunking Myths in Organizational Science and Practice and Paving New Paths Forward”, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 36/6, pp. 945-967, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-020-09715-2.
[55] Ryan, S. (2021), Promising Partnership Practices to Support Children’s Learning, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
[28] Sachs, J. (2015), “Teacher professionalism: why are we still talking about it?”, Teachers and Teaching, Vol. 22/4, pp. 413-425, https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1082732.
[73] Shanks, R. et al. (2022), “A comparative study of mentoring for new teachers”, Professional Development in Education, doi: 10.1080/19415257.2020.1744684, pp. 751-765, https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1744684.
[22] Suarez, V. and J. McGrath (2022), “Teacher professional identity: How to develop and support it in times of change”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 267, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b19f5af7-en.
[57] Villalba-García, E. (2021), “Validation of non-formal and informal learning: The hero with a thousand faces?”, European Journal of Education, https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12468, pp. 351-364, https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12468.
[68] Weinhandl, R. et al. (2023), “Using student personas when developing digital mathematics learning resources to improve teacher training”, Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, Vol. 40/1, pp. 57-72, https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2023.2291370.
[67] Weinhandl, R. et al. (2022), “Personas Characterising Secondary School Mathematics Students: Development and Applications to Educational Technology”, Education Sciences, Vol. 12/7, p. 447, https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12070447.
[13] Wood, S. et al. (2021), “Collective foresight and intelligence for sustainability”, Global Sustainability, Vol. 4, p. e3, https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2021.3.
[26] Zhao, H. (2017), “The influence of field teaching practice on pre-service teachers’ professional identity: A mixed methods study”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 8, p. 1264, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01264.
[43] Zimmermann, A. et al. (2021), “Creative virtual conferencing and networking to advance higher education for sustainable development”, https://www.irdo.si/irdo2021ref/referati/01-c01-zimmerman.pdf (accessed on 28 August 2025).
← 1. Generational research is considered controversial, but identifying traits and common denominators in different life phases is considered valuable for organisational science and practice (Rudolph et al., 2020[77]).