The Enablers of Change – policymakers, cross-sectoral partners, the school community and leaders – play a distinct but interconnected role in shaping the educational landscape. Their potential to influence and support systems in achieving the shared aspirations identified in this report – career fulfilment, teacher well-being, and bringing innovation into the classroom – is the focus of this chapter.
Co‑constructing Visions for the Future of Teaching
Abstract
As mentioned in previous chapters, the Future of Teaching studies were a participatory process that actively engaged teachers and a broad range of stakeholders in co-constructing preferred scenarios for the future of teaching. Throughout the project, participants collaboratively articulated their visions and aspirations for education, resulting in specific yet interconnected scenarios that reflect their hopes for the profession's evolution. To systematically identify the key transformative ideas emerging from the three education systems involved – the Flemish Community of Belgium (OECD, 2024[1]), Wales (OECD, 2025[2]) and Austria (OECD, 2025[3]) – a thematic analysis was conducted, guided by the approach of Braun and Clarke (2022[4]).
The analysis revealed a set of critical actors and factors influencing teaching practices: The Enablers of Change. These Enablers – policymakers, cross-sectoral partners, school communities and leaders – each play a distinct role in shaping the educational landscape. Their combined potential is essential for achieving the Aspirations for the Future of Teaching identified in this report.
This chapter presents a roadmap for action by the Enablers with the aspirations and how they could help realise them. The chapter is organised into three sections, each focused on one aspiration. Within these, subsections are dedicated to each of the four Enablers, outlining practical approaches and strategies that each actor could consider. These are summarised in the Infographic in the next page. The strategies build on three complementary foundations:
1. Insights from workshops and discussions, which brought forward educators’ and stakeholders’ priorities and lived experiences;
2. National and international research that supports the “What if…” statements and ambition loops that resonated across the systems;
3. Concrete initiatives and examples already driving change in schools and systems.
This structure ensures that the chapter works not only as an analytical synthesis but also as a practical guide for different audiences – whether policymakers, system leaders, educators or external partners. Because the Enablers do not operate in isolation and the aspirations are deeply interconnected, some repetition is maintained across sections to emphasise these interdependencies. The chapter highlights the importance of collaboration across levels and sectors to build a future-ready teaching profession, demonstrating how collective action can turn aspirations into meaningful change.
Career fulfilment through individual and collective growth
Policymakers create clear and flexible career pathways underpinned with sustained and research-informed professional development
Policy makers play a central role in facilitating a profession where teachers can thrive, grow and lead change. This requires policies that embed professional learning and (long-term) career development into the fabric of the education system.
One powerful lever is structured collaboration: Networks that connect schools with shared contexts or interests create opportunities for mutual learning, mentoring and innovation (Jones, 2022[5]) (Sinnema et al., 2021[6]). In Wales, school-to-school partnerships have strengthened teacher growth, improved well-being, and supported pupils and families (ESTYN, 2020[7]). Examples from Flanders illustrate how structured spaces for research-practice exchange help teachers integrate new approaches while validating their expertise (Brinckman and Versluys, 2021[8]).
Policies should address the unique challenges of early-career teachers, especially in disadvantaged or rural schools, where teacher attrition is high. Evidence shows that structured support and strong mentorship have more impact on retention than the challenges of context itself (Backers, Tuytens and Devos, 2020[9]) (Williams, Williamson and Siebert, 2022[10]). Beyond immediate support, systems need flexible professional learning ecosystems that allow teachers to refine expertise and pursue individual passions (Elliott and Stemler, 2008[11]) (Joinel Alvarez and Lussi Borer, 2023[12]).
Cross-sectoral partners expand teachers’ learning ecosystems by providing access to expertise, resources and real-world experiences beyond education
Career fulfilment is nurtured by professional opportunities that reach beyond their immediate school or sector. Partnerships with industries, cultural institutions and public services enrich teachers’ expertise, promote innovation and enhance their sense of belonging to a wider professional ecosystem.
Partnerships with the private sector create additional opportunities for teacher development. Collaborations with industries in fields like technology, engineering and health sciences expose teachers to cutting-edge methodologies and tools, helping them integrate emerging knowledge into their teaching (OECD, 2023[13]). Companies can also provide externships or job-shadowing opportunities, enabling teachers to experience professional environments outside education and bring real-world insights into their classrooms. These exchanges could build teachers’ skills and demonstrate the relevance of classroom learning for students’ future careers.
Cross-sector engagement also supports career diversification and retention. Structured exchanges with experts in leadership development, curriculum innovation and applied research give teachers opportunities to diversify their expertise, gain recognition and grow within the profession (Mezza, 2022[14]) (OECD, 2023[13]). Exchanges with creative and cultural sectors, such as arts organisations or media industries, can also foster new pedagogies, creative practices, and interdisciplinary thinking that strengthen innovation in schools. Partnerships with cultural and civic institutions – museums, science centres, local businesses and NGOs – create real-world learning contexts for both teachers and students (Villalba-García, 2021[15]; El Bedewy, Lavicza and Lyublinskaya, n.d.[16]). These connections support the vision of schools as hubs in “learning cities”, positioning teaching as a bridge between academic content and societal challenges (Facer and Buchczyk, 2019[17]).
The idea of teachers and other educational staff working in other sectors is not an easy sell. For policymakers to agree on it, nor for enablers to realise constructions in which these possibilities become concrete, would take time. For example, to maximise impact, teachers would need training and systemic support to navigate interdisciplinary work. Initial teacher education and professional development can build collaboration skills (Lawson and van Veen, 2015[18]), while education leaders ensure partnerships are strategically embedded in school practices (Bax et al., 2023[19]).
School communities create ecosystems of trust, collaboration and support that empower teachers to thrive
School communities play a central role in shaping how teachers experience their work. When schools intentionally cultivate trust, shared purpose and collaboration, they create an environment where teachers feel valued and supported, boosting their confidence, motivation and professional growth. Research shows that participatory decision-making fosters teacher agency and strengthens commitment to school improvement (Van Wingerden and Poell, 2019[20]; Devos et al., 2016[21]). Schools that actively integrate teachers’ voices into vision-setting and daily decision-making processes nurture a sense of collective ownership over teaching and learning.
Thriving school communities extend beyond teachers and students, recognising families and local networks as integral partners. Strong school–family relationships foster trust, enhance students’ learning environments, and provide teachers with essential insights to better address diverse needs (Gu, 2021[22]; Epstein, 2021[23]; Ryan, 2021[24]). Teachers’ professionalism plays a pivotal role in creating welcoming environments where parents feel valued as co-educators (Epstein and Sheldon, 2023[25]; Epstein, 2018[26]; Ryan, 2021[24]). Training teachers to engage with families effectively helps dismantle “idealised” parental involvement models, replacing them with approaches that embrace the diversity of families’ circumstances and contributions (Jezierski and Wall, 2019[27]; Pushor and Amendt, 2018[28]; Goodall et al., 2022[29]).
Beyond family partnerships, schools can act as community anchors, connecting teachers and students to wider social, cultural and economic networks. Community-linked initiatives, such as local mentorship programmes, volunteering schemes and cultural partnerships, enrich teaching practice and strengthen teachers’ sense of purpose by situating their work in broader civic life (Villalba-García, 2021[15]; El Bedewy, Lavicza and Lyublinskaya, n.d.[16]). When schools act as community anchors, they role model inclusive, collaborative leadership, positioning teachers as contributors to a wider social mission, beyond their direct work in classrooms.
These interconnected networks also improve teacher retention and well-being. In schools where leaders and communities invest in professional dialogue, peer support, and co-designed strategies, teachers are more likely to remain motivated, innovative, and engaged (Beaufort Research and NFER, 2019[30]).
School Leaders build a culture of collaboration, mentoring and shared learning to strengthen teaching
School leaders play an important role in shaping teacher development, both individual and collective. Leaders who invest in continuous professional learning for themselves (Mombaers, Vanlommel and Van Petegem, 2020[31]) and their teams (Elliott and Stemler, 2008[11]; Joinel Alvarez and Lussi Borer, 2023[12]) ensure that expertise is developed throughout the school, strengthening teaching quality and morale.
A culture of mentorship is a hallmark of strong leadership. Leaders at every level can support experienced teachers to guide new entrants, helping them navigate professional challenges and integrate into their school communities (Shanks et al., 2022[32]) (Dreer-Goethe, 2023[33]). Research shows that effective mentorship builds teacher identity and agency while fostering a collaborative ethos (Tonna, Bjerkholt and Holland, 2017[34]).
Effective leaders create conditions for collaboration and shared inquiry, ensuring that teachers have time, trust and resources to engage meaningfully with colleagues. Policymakers have therefore prioritised this. The Welsh Government for example, has identified high-quality teaching and leadership as a driver of equity and student success, especially in disadvantaged contexts (Welsh Government, 2023[35]). Leaders who actively connect schools with complementary needs, such as Welsh-medium schools in English-speaking communities, demonstrate how strategic partnerships can reduce isolation, build capacity and improve outcomes for both teachers and learners (ESTYN, 2024[36]) (Egan, 2016[37]).
To achieve this, policy frameworks must invest strategically in leadership capacity. Leaders need structured training, peer learning opportunities and the autonomy to adapt human resources (HR) strategies to their contexts. Effective leadership also depends on governance structures that balance autonomy and accountability, enabling teams to innovate while maintaining coherence (Wen, Qiang and Gloor, 2018[38]).
Cultivating teacher well-being
Policymakers safeguard teacher well-being through targeted support and systemic alignment
Teacher well-being and retention depend on policies that address the realities of teaching in high-pressure, diverse and sometimes challenging contexts. Many teachers in many different education systems indicate a high workload and stress in their work. Governments have recognised this fact, and policymakers in many systems are engaged in combating workload and stress. However, this has not been easy. Structured support can play a more decisive role in teacher retention than the difficulties of the teaching context itself. Policymakers can safeguard teachers’ workload balance and mental health by embedding comprehensive mentoring systems, professional coaching, and access to external expertise into teacher development strategies. These measures not only reduce stress and burnout but also enhance teachers’ capacity to focus on high-quality teaching and learning.
Achieving this requires a systemic approach that integrates education policy with broader services and support structures. Cross-ministerial collaboration helps align education with health, social services, and community development, creating a coherent ecosystem of support for teachers and schools (Holroyd, 2022[39]; Nilsson Brodén, 2022[40]) (OECD Top Class Podcast, 2024[41]). By coordinating efforts and reducing duplication, policymakers can ensure that teachers have consistent access to well-being initiatives, networks, and resources, helping sustain a resilient and motivated workforce.
Cross-sectoral partners expand well-being support for students and teachers
Collaboration with external professionals helps create a child-centred approach to education, ensuring that students receive comprehensive support that extends beyond the classroom. Partners, such as social workers, health practitioners and cultural educators can provide expertise and resources that strengthen student well-being and learning, contributing to a more holistic educational experience (OECD, 2017[42]; OECD, 2025[43]). By sharing responsibility for student support, these partnerships can ease the burden on teachers, reducing the (sense of) expectation that they address every academic, emotional and social need alone.
School communities embed teacher well-being at the heart of school culture
The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the critical role of in-person interactions for both student learning and teacher well-being, highlighting the challenges of isolation and its effects on engagement and professional growth (Parry, 2022[44]; Tesar, 2021[45]). On-site learning environments not only support student mental health (Hoover and Bostic, 2021[46]) but also create opportunities for informal knowledge exchange among teachers, strengthening collaboration and professional development (Hoover and Bostic, 2021[46]). Teachers’ proximity to their local communities also allows them to draw on local knowledge and resources, tailoring their teaching to student needs and fostering community trust (OECD, 2022[47]; Parry, 2022[44]) (VBJK, 2018[48]).
Embedding these connections into school life benefits teachers as well as students. Initiatives where educators actively engage with families and communities, such as home visits for incoming first graders in Flanders, build trust, strengthen relationships, and ease student transitions (Mertens et al., 2021[49]). Teachers who feel connected to their communities report higher job satisfaction and a deeper understanding of students’ backgrounds (DeMatthews, 2018[50]; Iyengar, 2021[51]) (Nilsson Brodén, 2022[40]).
A strong sense of belonging is equally important for teachers themselves, particularly those relocating or entering the profession. Mentorship and social integration efforts can help teachers feel supported and part of their school culture (Williams, Williamson and Siebert, 2022[10]), which in turn enhances collective teacher efficacy and shared educational norms (Belfi et al., 2015[52]).
School leaders champion well-being by designing supportive and collaborative environments
School leaders play a key role in fostering environments where teachers can thrive. Strong leadership not only supports professional growth and innovation but also creates a culture where teachers feel valued, supported, and empowered. Research shows that leadership practices which prioritise teacher well-being can significantly reduce stress levels and prevent burnout, helping maintain a motivated and effective teaching workforce (Van Droogenbroeck, et al., 2020[53]).
A key part of this is designing collaborative structures that reduce isolation and share responsibility for improvement. Initiatives at school, regional or national levels can alleviate the pressures of change by distributing expertise and workload across teams and schools (Sinnema et al., 2021[6]). School-to-school partnerships, for example, not only strengthens teaching practice but also provides teachers with a sense of belonging and professional purpose (ESTYN, 2020[7]).
By fostering collaboration as a tool for mutual support rather than competition, leaders can help shift cultures from isolated improvement efforts to shared transformation (Beaufort Research and NFER, 2019[30]). This requires leadership that actively values professional dialogue, inquiry and collective problem-solving as essential parts of teachers’ work, recognising their role in sustaining teacher motivation, reducing burnout and strengthening overall school well-being (Bristow, 2021[54]).
Bringing innovation into the classroom
Policymakers create enabling conditions for schools to experiment and innovate
Policymakers can unlock innovation by creating policy and governance structures that allow schools to experiment, share ideas and scale effective practices.
Innovation flourishes when systems establish clear structures for collaboration. Effective governance empowers schools with autonomy while providing mechanisms for quality assurance and peer learning. In Wales, policy frameworks encourage collaboration across schools, higher education institutions and industry to connect curriculum development with broader system goals (Welsh Government, 2023[35]). Well-designed school-to-school networks help educators share expertise, contribute to successful professional development and specialisations, and strengthen curriculum leadership, which in turn fuels system-wide improvements (Beaufort Research and NFER, 2019[30]) (Harris, Jones and Crick, 2020[55]) (Goh et al., 2022[56]) (Glover et al., 2023[57]).
Policymakers can also build infrastructure for professional exchange by investing in virtual hubs, curated resource libraries and structured teacher networks that support both flexibility and quality in curriculum design (OECD, 2023[58]) (Newton, 2020[59]). These platforms must be matched with dedicated time and resources for educators to engage in collaborative inquiry, ensuring that innovation is not an additional burden but a central part of professional practice.
Finally, policies should signal trust in teachers and leaders as innovators. Strategic investments in leadership development, access to research partnerships and opportunities for joint curriculum design create environments where experimentation is safe, supported and rewarded (Bristow, 2022[60]).
Cross-sectoral partners bring expertise and resources to fuel innovation in schools
Partnerships with sectors beyond education can help schools test and embed cutting-edge practices. Collaborations with technology firms, healthcare providers and cultural institutions can expose teachers to emerging digital tools, enabling them to integrate innovative teaching practices. Similarly, partnerships with healthcare providers can help teachers develop strategies to support student well-being and mental health, ensuring a more inclusive learning environment. Joint initiatives, such as mentorship programmes with professionals from diverse sectors, can enrich teachers' professional development while offering students exposure to varied career pathways (Bryson, Crosby and Stone, 2015[61]; National Research Council, 2015[62]; OECD, 2021[63]). Such interdisciplinary engagement can strengthen teacher education strategies (Glover et al., 2023[57]) and broaden teachers’ expertise while exposing students to varied career pathways.
These partnerships bring real-world learning into classrooms through project-based work, guest lectures and apprenticeship-style initiatives, making education more relevant and dynamic (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020[64]). By prioritising proactive relationships between schools and external organisations, systems can create a culture of mutual learning, enrich teacher development and equip students with the skills needed to thrive in a rapidly evolving society. Lastly, it is important that collaboration in this form lead to less work for teachers, instead of more work. The assumption would always need to be that external organisations reduce workload rather than increase it.
School communities embrace and co-develop innovative approaches, ensuring relevance and engagement
Schools can act as “anchor institutions” within their communities, connecting students, families, and local organisations to create learning environments that extend beyond the classroom (Halsey, 2018[65]). Positioning schools as community hubs fosters civic life (Hildreth, 2012[66]; Mersand et al., 2019[67]), draws on local expertise, and enriches teaching with diverse cultural and social experiences (Darling-Hammond and Cook-Harvey, 2018[68]; Masson, Antony-Newman and Antony-Newman, 2022[69]). This vision relies on multi-stakeholder partnerships that tackle challenges such as poverty and access to services, using schools as convening spaces where educators, social workers, and community partners collaborate to provide wraparound support for families (Mertens et al., 2021[49]; ESTYN, 2024[36]).
When schools co-develop initiatives with their communities, they create learning experiences rooted in real-world contexts – from partnerships with cultural institutions and libraries to sports clubs and health services – that foster student belonging and engagement (Mujtaba et al., 2018[70]) (Pedretti and Navas Iannini, 2020[71]). This approach strengthens the teaching profession’s role in society while deepening trust between families, educators and local networks (OECD, 2025[43]; Brinckman and Versluys, 2021[8]).
Leaders drive innovation by creating space for professional collaboration and shared leadership
Innovation flourishes when leaders at every level of the education system create time and structures for collaboration, professional dialogue and inquiry. Effective leadership involves balancing autonomy and accountability, enabling teams to experiment, take risks and pursue opportunities for improvement (Wen, Qiang and Gloor, 2018[38]). Co-constructing new curricula for example, highlights the value of distributed leadership models – including subject, pedagogic, and system leadership – which allow educators to take ownership of change and embed innovation at multiple levels of the system. Teacher leadership, in particular, is emerging as a key driver of school and system improvement, with curriculum leadership sparking micro-innovations that contribute to broader pedagogical advancements (Harris, Jones and Crick, 2020[55]).
Sustaining a culture of innovation requires leaders to champion professional sharing as a core element of educators’ work. Dedicated time and space for collaboration, supported by higher education institutions and research organisations, ensures that educators can access expertise to strengthen inquiry-based professional learning (Bristow, 2022[60]). By embedding these collaborative structures within schools and aligning them with system-wide policy frameworks, leaders create the conditions for meaningful innovation to thrive across classrooms, schools, and networks.
Achieving the shared aspirations of career fulfilment, teacher well-being and bringing innovation into the classroom requires a collective effort across multiple actors and a deep understanding of the interconnected nature of education systems. No single individual or group can transform an education system in isolation, nor is there a one-size-fits-all solution for the complex, evolving challenges that schools and systems face. System changes and transformation require a system perspective – an understanding that change emerges from the dynamic interactions between policymakers, leaders, teachers, families and communities, as well as the context, structures and practices that shape their collaboration.
The thematic analysis highlighted four key Enablers of Change – policymakers, cross-sectoral partners, school communities and leadership – each playing a distinct yet interdependent role in supporting these aspirations. For instance, when it comes to fostering career fulfilment, policymakers can strengthen teacher growth by creating flexible career pathways and embedding sustained professional learning into the system. Cross-sector partnerships expand teachers’ access to expertise and resources beyond education, while school communities provide ecosystems of trust and support. Leaders at all levels can tie these elements together by cultivating a culture of mentorship and shared learning. Together, these actions create an environment where teachers can thrive, grow professionally, and feel valued throughout their careers.
Similarly, advancing teacher well-being requires a holistic approach that extends beyond individual interventions. Policymakers play a vital role in safeguarding teacher well-being through targeted support and systemic alignment, while external partners bring additional resources to alleviate pressure on schools and provide wraparound services. School communities can cultivate cultures of belonging that promote well-being, particularly for teachers working in challenging contexts, and leaders can champion supportive practices that strengthen resilience and trust. This collective approach not only enhances teacher satisfaction and retention but also has the potential to improve outcomes for students and communities.
For bringing innovation into the classroom, enabling conditions across all levels of the system is key. Policymakers can provide the space and flexibility for schools to experiment, while cross-sector partnerships infuse innovation with new expertise and cutting-edge practices. School communities, as co-creators of change, ensure that innovations remain relevant and grounded in local needs, and leaders model a culture of professional collaboration and shared leadership. By aligning these efforts, systems can foster an innovation-friendly environment that empowers teachers to reimagine their practice and embrace new ways of teaching and learning.
This chapter is designed as a practical guide for action. Each section invites different audiences – policymakers, partners, educators, and leaders – to reflect on their unique roles and contributions to system change. While some repetition occurs across sections, this intentional overlap reflects the reality that aspirations and enablers are deeply interconnected; no aspiration can be achieved in isolation, and collaboration is essential to success. By drawing from the insights, research, and practical examples presented here, each actor can identify leverage points and opportunities to work collectively towards a future-ready teaching profession.
References
[9] Backers, L., M. Tuytens and G. Devos (2020), “Het aantrekken en behouden van leraren in een grootstedelijke context [Attracting and retaining teachers in a metropolitan context]”, https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/8713246 (accessed on 8 September 2026).
[19] Bax, W. et al. (2023), What works best in the school-to-work transition?, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd-events.org/e/oecd-forum-2023-the-school-to-work-transition (accessed on 8 February 2025).
[30] Beaufort Research and NFER (2019), Research study on the attractiveness of teaching, and retention of teachers. Welsh Government, Welsh Government, Cardiff, https://www.gov.wales/statistics-and-research/research-study-attractiveness-teaching-retention-teachers/?lang=en (accessed on 6 March 2024).
[52] Belfi, B. et al. (2015), “School-based social capital: The missing link between schools’ socioeconomic composition and collective teacher efficacy”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 45, pp. 33-44, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.09.001.
[4] Braun, V. and V. Clarke (2022), “Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis.”, Qualitative Psychology, Vol. 9/1, pp. 3-26, https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000196.
[8] Brinckman, P. and K. Versluys (2021), “Naar de kern: de leerlingen en hun leer-kracht [To the core: the pupils and their learning power]”, Rapport van de Commissie Beter Onderwijs, https://onderwijs.vlaanderen.be/sites/default/files/2021-10/RAPPORT-OK19%20oktober.pdf (accessed on 27 May 2026).
[60] Bristow, E. (2022), Developing an evidence-informed education profession in Wales: A review of research evidence, https://hwb.gov.wales/api/storage/5e004a8c-d30d-45e4-8aab-14b02fe6c9fd/developing-an-evidence-informed-education-profession-in-wales.pdf (accessed on 8 September 2026).
[54] Bristow, E. (2021), The Impact of Professional Learning on Practitioners, Pupils and School Improvement: An Evidence Review, Welsh Government & Cardiff University, Cardiff.
[61] Bryson, J., B. Crosby and M. Stone (2015), “Designing and implementing cross-sector collaborations: Needed and challenging”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 75/5, pp. 647-663, https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12432.
[68] Darling-Hammond, L. and C. Cook-Harvey (2018), Educating the Whole Child: Improving School Climate to Support Student Success, Learning Policy Institute, Palo Alto.
[64] 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.
[50] DeMatthews, D. (2018), “School leadership, social capital, and community engagement: A case study of an elementary school in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico.”, School Community Journal, Vol. 28/1, pp. 167-194.
[21] Devos, G. et al. (2016), “Uitdagingen voor personeelsbeleid: Aanwerving en opdrachttoewijzing in Vlaamse basis-en secundaire scholen”, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222518 (accessed on 8 September 2026).
[33] Dreer-Goethe, B. (2023), “Well-being and mentoring in pre-service teacher education: an integrative literature review”, International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, Vol. 12/4, pp. 336-349, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-09-2022-0073.
[37] Egan, D. (2016), “Educational Equity in Wales”, Wales Journal of Education, Vol. 18/1, pp. 21-44, https://journal.uwp.co.uk/wje/article/335/galley/354/view/.
[16] 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.
[11] Elliott, J. and S. Stemler (2008), “Teacher authority, tacit knowledge, and the training of teachers”, in Scruggs, T. and M. Mastropieri (eds.), Personnel Preparation, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-004X(08)00003-7.
[23] Epstein, J. (2021), The Nordic Model of Education and Home-School Relations, AERA Annual Meeting Family, School, Community Partnerships SIG.
[26] 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.
[25] Epstein, J. and S. Sheldon (2023), School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools, Taylor and Francis, New York.
[36] ESTYN (2024), HMCI Annual Report 2022-2023, https://annual-report.estyn.gov.wales/app/uploads/2024/01/Estyn-Annual-Report-2022.23.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2024).
[7] 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 27 May 2026).
[17] 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.
[57] Glover, A. et al. (2023), “How do we achieve the third space? The challenges and strengths of partnership working to deliver a flexible PGCE Programme in Wales”, Wales Journal of Education, Vol. 25/1, https://doi.org/10.16922/wje.25.1.2.
[56] Goh, Z. et al. (2022), “An integrative multilevel review of thriving at work: Assessing progress and promise”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 43/2, pp. 197-213, https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2571.
[29] Goodall, J. et al. (2022), “Diffinio Ymgysylltiad Rhieni ag AGA: o berthnasoedd i bartneriaethau”, Cylchgrawn Addysg Cymru / Wales Journal of Education, Vol. 24/2, https://doi.org/10.16922/wje.24.2.2.
[22] Gu, L. (2021), Inclusion, Exclusion, or Segregation: Parents’ Position in Education in Sweden, AERA SIG-Family, School, Community Partnerships Paper and Symposium Sessions.
[65] Halsey, J. (2018), Independent Review into Regional, Rural and Remote Education, Australian Department of Education, https://www.education.gov.au/quality-schools-package/independent-review-regional-rural-and-remote-education (accessed on 27 May 2026).
[55] Harris, A., M. Jones and T. Crick (2020), “Curriculum leadership: a critical contributor to school and system improvement”, School Leadership & Management, doi: 10.1080/13632434.2020.1704470, pp. 1-4, https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2020.1704470.
[66] Hildreth, S. (2012), “Inspiring libraries as community anchors”, National Civic Review, Vol. 101/4, pp. 44-48.
[39] Holroyd, C. (2022), “Technological innovation and building a ‘super smart’ society: Japan’s vision of society 5.0”, Journal of Asian Public Policy, Vol. 15/1, pp. 18-31, https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2020.1749340.
[46] Hoover, S. and J. Bostic (2021), “Best practices and considerations for student mental health screening in schools”, Journal of Adolescent Health, Vol. 68/2, pp. 225-226, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.11.004.
[51] Iyengar, R. (2021), “Rethinking community participation in education post Covid-19”, Prospects, Vol. 51/1, pp. 437-447, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09538-2.
[27] Jezierski, S. and G. Wall (2019), “Changing understandings and expectations of parental involvement in education”, Gender and Education, Vol. 31/7, pp. 811-826, https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2017.1332340.
[12] Joinel Alvarez, V. and V. Lussi Borer (2023), “Breaking in the black box of pedagogical authority. Combined analysis of video and think-aloud protocols”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 134, p. 104310, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104310.
[5] Jones, K. (2022), Insight Series - Leading Professional Learning, https://nael.cymru/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Professor-Ken-Jones-Leading-Professional-Learning-FINAL-1.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2025).
[18] Lawson, H. and D. van Veen (2015), “A Planning Framework for the Five Core Components”, in Developing Community Schools, Community Learning Centers, Extended-service Schools and Multi-service Schools, Springer International Publishing, Cham, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25664-1_4.
[69] Masson, M., M. Antony-Newman and M. Antony-Newman (2022), “The immigrant perspective: Eastern-European parental discourses about the value of French, plurilingualism and plurilingual literacy practices”, International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, Vol. 25/9, pp. 3507-3520, https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2022.2079372.
[67] Mersand, S. et al. (2019), “Public Libraries as Anchor Institutions in Smart Communities: Current Practices and Future Development”, Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, https://doi.org/10.24251/hicss.2019.399.
[49] Mertens, C. et al. (2021), Kan onderwijs zonder welzijn? En vice versa? [Can education exist without wellbeing? And vice versa?], Mammoet, Antwerp.
[14] 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.
[31] Mombaers, T., K. Vanlommel and P. Van Petegem (2020), “De loopbaan van onderwijsprofessionals [Careers of education professionals]”, Gent: Steunpunt Onderwijsonderzoek, https://data-onderwijs.vlaanderen.be/documenten/bestanden/7570.pdf (accessed on 8 September 2026).
[70] Mujtaba, T. et al. (2018), “Learning and engagement through natural history museums”, Studies in Science Education, Vol. 54/1, pp. 41-67, https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2018.1442820.
[62] National Research Council (2015), Transforming the Workforce for Children Birth Through Age 8: A Unifying Foundation, National Academies Press.
[59] Newton, N. (2020), “The rationale for subsidiarity as a principle applied within curriculum reform and its unintended consequences”, The Curriculum Journal, Vol. 31/2, pp. 215-230, https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.37.
[40] 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.
[3] 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.
[2] OECD (2025), Constructing Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Wales, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2e0ac4e6-en.
[43] 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.
[1] 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.
[58] OECD (2023), “Enhancing school improvement reform in New South Wales (Australia)”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, No. 75, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/36135b5b-en.
[13] OECD (2023), Retaining Talent at All Ages, Ageing and Employment Policies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/00dbdd06-en.
[47] OECD (2022), Trends Shaping Education 2022, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6ae8771a-en.
[63] OECD (2021), Starting Strong VI: Supporting Meaningful Interactions in Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f47a06ae-en.
[42] OECD (2017), Starting Strong V: Transitions from Early Childhood Education and Care to Primary Education, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264276253-en.
[41] OECD Top Class Podcast (2024), “Tired, stressed and burnt out: Strategies to support teacher well-being and healthy working environments”, https://www.oecd.org/en/blogs/2024/11/tired-stressed-and-burnt-out-strategies-to-support-teacher-well-being-and-healthy-working-environments.html (accessed on 4 March 2025).
[44] Parry, L. (2022), A New Definition of Success with Valerie Hannon, https://www.thelearningfuture.com/the-learning-future-podcast/episode-2-a-new-definition-of-success-with-valerie-hannon (accessed on 26 May 2026).
[71] Pedretti, E. and A. Navas Iannini (2020), “Towards fourth-generation science museums: Changing goals, changing roles”, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Vol. 20/4, pp. 700-714, https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-020-00128-0.
[28] Pushor, D. and T. Amendt (2018), “Leading an examination of beliefs and assumptions about parents”, School Leadership & Management, Vol. 38/2, pp. 202-221 202-221.
[24] Ryan, S. (2021), Promising Partnership Practices to Support Children’s Learning, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
[32] 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.
[6] Sinnema, C. et al. (2021), “When seekers reap rewards and providers pay a price: The role of relationships and discussion in improving practice in a community of learning”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 107, p. 103474, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103474.
[45] Tesar, M. (2021), “Future studies: Reimagining our educational futures in the post-Covid-19 world”, Policy Futures in Education, Vol. 19/1, pp. 1-6, https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210320986950.
[34] Tonna, M., E. Bjerkholt and E. Holland (2017), “Teacher mentoring and the reflective practitioner approach”, International journal of mentoring and coaching in education, Vol. 6/3, pp. 210-227, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-04-2017-0032.
[53] Van Droogenbroeck,, F. et al. (2020), TALIS 2018 Vlaanderen - Volume II, https://data-onderwijs.vlaanderen.be/documenten/bestanden/TALIS-2018-verdiepend-rapport-diversiteit.pdf (accessed on 8 September 2026).
[20] Van Wingerden, J. and R. Poell (2019), “Meaningful work and resilience among teachers: The mediating role of work engagement and job crafting”, PloS one, Vol. 14/9, p. e0222518, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6752839/ (accessed on 8 September 2026).
[48] VBJK (2018), Warm, welkom en wederkerig. Naar een goede ouder-school samenwerking. Inspiratieboek voor kleuteronderwijs, [Warm, welcoming and reciprocal: Towards effective parent-school collaboration. A source of inspiration for early years education], https://vbjk.be/nl/publicaties/warm-welkom-en-wederkerig (accessed on 26 May 2026).
[15] 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.
[35] Welsh Government (2023), Our national mission: High standards and aspirations for all, Welsh Government, https://www.gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2023-03/our-national-mission-high-standards-and-aspirations-for-all_0.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2024).
[38] Wen, Q., M. Qiang and P. Gloor (2018), “Speeding up decision-making in project environment: The effects of decision makers’ collaboration network dynamics”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 36/5, pp. 819-831, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.02.006.
[10] Williams, H., J. Williamson and C. Siebert (2022), “Exploring perceptions related to teacher retention issues in rural western United States”, Australian and International Journal of Rural Education, Vol. 32/2, pp. 91-106, https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.625410012717801.