This chapter describes the context and aims of the study of the future of teaching in Austria and provides an overview of the methodology used.
Constructing Scenarios for the Future of Teaching in Austria
Abstract
Classrooms are where the future takes root, where not only teachers and students come together but where today’s knowledge meets tomorrow’s societies (BMB, 2024[1]). How can schools keep up with this responsibility in times where teacher shortages are a pressing concern (Kroislaitner, 2024[2]; European Commission: Directorate-General for Education, 2023[3]), and students’ performance seems to be declining across OECD countries (OECD, 2023[4])? Austria has made bold developments to refresh and reform its education system in recent years, with the Education Reform Act of 2017 (Bildungsreformgesetz 2017) reflecting a commitment to reimagining the teaching profession and schooling in a broader sense (BMB, 2024[5]). It emphasises greater school autonomy and space for innovation, the professionalisation of management in education, and evidence-based decision making (Köster, Shewbridge and Krämer, 2020[6]). Another key development in the Austrian system is its effort to create a modern, positive image of the teaching profession and attract both young talent and professionals from other fields into the classroom. The initiative Klasse Job has helped to recruit school graduates and second-career teachers in the 2023/2024 school year (BMB, 2024[1]; Schnider and Braunsteiner, 2024[7]).
While these new teachers are a welcome addition, the next question arises: how can Austria's 124,000 educators be effectively supported and retained (Statistik Austria, 2024[8])? The Austrian education system – and the teachers that work in it – already has several strengths. According to the OECD’s Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS), Austrian teachers collaborate more than their peers in many European Union countries, and engage in a culture of shared knowledge and responsibility (OECD, 2020[9]; Schmich and Opriessnig, 2020[10]). Austrian teachers are well aware of their crucial role in society – in fact, 96% of lower secondary teachers cite the opportunity to influence children’s development or contribute to society as a major motivation for choosing their profession (OECD, 2019[11]). According to TALIS 2018, they rank among the most satisfied educators across all education systems: Austrian teachers agree more often with statements like “The advantages of being a teacher clearly outweigh the disadvantages” and “If I could decide again, I would still choose to work as a teacher” than teachers in other systems around the world (Zakariya, Bjørkestøl and Nilsen, 2020[12]).
However, more recent research shows that only a third of Austrian teachers report being satisfied with their working conditions (Ableidinger, 2023[13]). Teacher stress and burnout are pressing issues, often driven by administrative burdens and unclear job expectations. These factors contribute to high levels of fatigue and dissatisfaction, impacting teacher retention (Lillich, Breil and Teufl, 2024[14]). Many teachers in Austria see their role evolving far beyond traditional teaching: at times, they act as guides and even "second parents" to students, which is fulfilling, but also leads to challenges for which teachers feel unprepared. Many highlight the need for multiprofessional teams and targeted measures to help students, especially those students with socio-economic or migration-related disadvantages (MEGA Bildungsstiftung, 2024[15]), and support to protect both their and their students’ mental health (Lillich, Breil and Teufl, 2024[14]).
The Austrian Ministry for Education invited the OECD to undertake a study to progress thinking and start anticipating proposed changes for teacher professionalism, empowerment, and identity. In collaboration with the Austrian Ministry for Education and a range of different stakeholders, the study was conducted between April and September 2024.
Building on the existing (Austrian and international) evidence base, and drawing on a diversity of perspectives, the study aims to explore a positive and sustainable narrative for the future of the teaching profession in Austria. It aims to generate a set of preferred scenarios for the future of teaching, that provide visions for the mid to long term, and that are supported and designed by a broad group of stakeholders working in education.
Specifically, the study has four core research questions for the future of teaching, which were formulated in conjunction with the Austrian Ministry for Education:
1. What will it mean to be a teacher in the future? What should be at the core of the teaching profession?
2. How to develop teacher professional identity and a more collaborative profession?
3. What are possible new ways for teachers to collaborate and co-operate as a team in knowledge management, but also on current topics about school or society? What steps can be taken towards a co-operative school?
4. What support services do teachers need to improve and maintain their physical and mental health?
These questions were developed by the Ministry’s team as part of a focus on developing a long-term strategy for the future of the teaching profession in Austria. Stakeholders considered how their preferred future scenario would address these research questions (see Chapter 4).
The Austrian study was performed through a structured process with four main activities (see Table 2.1), advancing from preparation, to development, to field work activities and lastly to summarising the findings of the study. The process was contextualised to match the situation, expectations and needs of the Austrian education system.
Source: Material gathered as part of the OECD study on New Professionalism and the Future of Teaching in Austria.
The different activities listed in Table 2.1 are described in more detail below. The methodology for the study is based on stakeholder participation: different stakeholders active in or around the education sector should be involved. Therefore, a mapping process of possible stakeholders was undertaken to identify who could be involved to participate during the different activities of the study. Stakeholder groups involved in the study included practitioners (school leaders, teachers, and student teachers), policy makers, teacher unions and researchers (teacher education and other academics).
Participation in the study was voluntary. Snowball sampling was used to invite stakeholders. A set of possible participants were invited initially by the ministry and were invited to forward the invitation to colleagues and other relevant stakeholders. A limitation of this study is that the stakeholder participants in each of the study activities are not a representative sample but rather a group of willing people who offered to share their expertise. Infographic 2.1. provides a visual representation for the methodology of the study, including the relationships between key components.
Source: Material gathered as part of the OECD study on New Professionalism and the Future of Teaching in Austria.
Research seminar
To adapt the research tools and gain a better understanding of the Austrian context, an online research seminar was organised. Eighteen researchers and teacher educators took part in this event. The research seminar provided feedback to develop both the ambition loops tool as well as the teacher personas tool, both were refined for use in the following phases of the study.
For the Ambition loops tool, including examining the research questions that were formulated by the Austrian Ministry of Education, four additional “What if…” areas and 22 related ambition loops were added (see bolded statements in Table 2.2). Some original ambition loops (see McGrath (2023[16])) were deleted for manageability and some other statements were changed to improve their use in the Austrian educational context. Research relevant to the Austrian context was added throughout the Ambition loops framework. A list of Ambition loops that were selected during the workshops and further development of the study can be found in Annex B.
Note: Each “What if…” statement summarises a set of ambition loops. The bolded statements refer to the new statements which were added following the Austrian research seminar.
Source: Adapted from (McGrath, 2023[17]), “What systematic connections should we have around schools to support the work of teachers?: Global lessons and the potential of ambition loops”, https://doi.org/10.1787/77de597c-en.
During the online research seminar, participants were also made familiar with the concept of teacher personas. Input was provided to think about several developments within Austrian society, schools, and the teacher workforce to consider when constructing the personas. This resulted in a ‘longlist’ of possible personas ideas to be studied in the Austrian context. The participants also shared research from Austria to support the personas ideas. Table 2.3 provides an overview of the longlist, as well as 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.
Source: Material gathered as part of the OECD study on New Professionalism and the Future of Teaching in Austria.
After having selected the Austrian teacher personas, the second step of the study was to begin the actual development. Work began by identifying relevant categories of traits that would shape the different personas. The selected personas were developed as a set of two fictional characters, to highlight both positive and negative effects of the categories attributed to the set. The personas that were constructed for the purpose of this study are grounded into TALIS 2018 findings, research from Austria and international research, including Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2022 findings. An overview of the 23 developed categories that shape the personas can be seen in figure 2.2. Chapter 3 presents the personas in a narrative fashion, with all elements linked to research in bold, and zooms in on a number of highlighted categories. The categories were highlighted because they (a) are indicative of features present in all of the personas (for example: the use of digital tools in schools) or (b) because they are of specific relevance to the context, character or feature of the specific persona described. Annex A presents an overview of the other categories that were derived and the research supporting these.
Note: A total of six sets of two persona types were constructed. Motivation and gender are categories that are represented in all teacher personas, while the other categories have been represented in one or more sets of persona types.
Source: Material gathered as part of the OECD study on New Professionalism and the Future of Teaching in Austria.
Stakeholder survey (data collection)
A next step in the study was to collect different perspectives on ambitions for the future of teaching from stakeholders in the education sector. Survey respondents from a variety of stakeholder groups were asked to rate each ambition and “What if…” statement on a scale of importance (Very important/ Less important/ Not important) and the level of change that they thought would be required to attain the suggested ambitions (Area of strength/ Short-term improvement/ Longer-term transformation). Overall, the statements expressed in the survey were rated of high importance to the Austrian education system. The average respondent rated 85% of the statements as being of very high importance. All ambitions rated higher for longer- term transformation and shorter-term improvement compared to being an area of strength. There was no particular theme related to the ambition statements rated to be of lower importance.
Table 2.4 highlights themes that were distilled from an analysis of the top 20 statements with the highest ratings for importance from the stakeholder survey in each of the levels of change.
Source: OECD survey on New Professionalism and the Future of Teaching in Austria (N=83).
Stakeholder workshops
Two stakeholder workshops were held in Salzburg and in Vienna in June 2024. Most of the participants in the stakeholder workshops had completed the stakeholder survey before participating. At the start of the workshop, each participant had the opportunity to review the ambition loops and results from the stakeholder survey. In addition, participants placed up to ten dots across the statements they most valued for their preferred scenario for the future of teaching/ schooling.
Stakeholders then worked collaboratively, using the ambition loops statements and their own discussions to generate preferred future scenarios for the future of teaching/schooling. Once the scenarios were generated, a further step provided opportunity to receive feedback on the proposed scenarios, including input for backward mapping to discuss possible actions needed to realise their preferred future scenarios. At the end of the session each group had the opportunity to strengthen their draft scenario based on the feedback.
A total of six preferred future scenarios were created across the two workshops. As outlined in the workshops, one of the next steps was for these to be distilled into a manageable number of scenarios to create a set of preferred scenarios for further development. A total of five scenarios were developed by merging scenarios that showed a large amount of similarity between them. Column one of Table 2.5 shows the long list of six scenarios created at the workshops. Column two shows the set of five final scenarios created. As part of the stakeholder workshops, 54 ambition loops/ what if statements out of a 163 total available were included in the long list of preferred future scenarios developed (see Annex B).
Source: Material gathered as part of the OECD study on New Professionalism and the Future of Teaching in Austria.
Teacher personas
Stakeholders who participated in the workshops were invited to an additional workshop after the scenarios were drafted. The purpose of this workshop was to strengthen the scenarios. A key focus of this workshop involved using the Austrian teacher personas to consider the relative benefits of the scenarios for different teacher personas as well as considering ways to action each of the scenarios. The final set of preferred scenarios for the future of teaching/ schooling, and the perceived responses from the personas are detailed in Chapter 4.
The next chapter outlines the six personas that were developed for this study, for which the methodology is described in (Textbox 1.1 and Chapter 2).
References
[13] Ableidinger, C. (2023), Warum die Schule den Kindern nicht die Flügel hebt. Umfrage unter Lehrerinnen und Lehrern [Why school doesn’t lift the children’s wings. Survey among teachers], https://www.talentebluehen.at/assets/publikationen/PB-Warum-die-Schule-den-Kindern-nicht-die-Fluegel-hebt.pdf (accessed on 21 March 2025).
[5] BMB (2024), Bildungsreformgesetz 2017 [Education Reform Act 2017], https://www.bmb.gv.at/Themen/schule/schulrecht/erk/bildungsreformgesetz_2017.html (accessed on 21 March 2025).
[1] BMB (2024), Ressortstrategie “Klasse Job” [Resort strategy “Klasse Job”], https://www.bmbwf.gv.at/Themen/schule/zrp/klassejob.html (accessed on 21 March 2025).
[3] European Commission: Directorate-General for Education, Y. (2023), Education and training monitor 2023 – Austria, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/123079 (accessed on 21 March 2025).
[6] Köster, F., C. Shewbridge and C. Krämer (2020), Promoting Education Decision Makers’ Use of Evidence in Austria, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/0ac0181e-en.
[2] Kroislaitner (2024), Lehrer am Limit: “Zu wenig Personal, zu wenig Ressourcen”, Der Standard, https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000233441/lehrer-am-limit-zu-wenig-personal-zu-wenig-ressourcen (accessed on 21 March 2025).
[14] Lillich, M., C. Breil and L. Teufl (2024), Gesundheitsbefragung von österreichischen Schulleitungen und Pädagog:innen [Health survey of Austrian school leaders and teachers], https://www.ifgp.at/cdscontent/load?contentid=10008.785921&version=1708352443 (accessed on 21 March 2025).
[16] 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.
[17] 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.
[15] MEGA Bildungsstiftung (2024), Forschungsbericht. Reality-check: Brennpunkt Schule? [Research report. Reality check: Schools as troubled hotspots?], https://www.megabildung.at/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Forschungsbericht.BrennpunktSchule.pdf (accessed on 26 August 2024).
[4] OECD (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en.
[9] 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.
[11] 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.
[10] Schmich, J. and S. Opriessnig (2020), Kooperation von Lehrkräften [Teacher cooperation], https://doi.org/10.17888/talis2018-2.
[7] Schnider, A. and Braunsteiner (2024), “Lehrkräftemangel in Österreich. Bestandsaufnahmen und Initiativen [Teacher shortage in Austria. Stocktaking and initiatives]”, journal für lehrerInnenbildung jlb 01/2024 Perspektiven zum Lehrpersonenmangel im deutschen Sprachraum, pp. 40-49, https://doi.org/10.35468/jlb-01-2024-03.
[8] Statistik Austria (2024), Teaching Staff, https://www.statistik.at/en/statistics/population-and-society/education/teaching-staff (accessed on 21 March 2025).
[12] Zakariya, Y., K. Bjørkestøl and H. Nilsen (2020), “Teacher job satisfaction across 38 countries and economies: An alignment optimization approach to a cross-cultural mean comparison”, International Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 101, p. 101573, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101573.