Reimagining Teaching in an Accelerating World

2. Strengthening the professional autonomy of educators and school leadership

How to balance teacher autonomy with accountability in the classroom?

The heart of great teaching is ownership. Successful education systems will do whatever it takes to develop ownership of professional practice by the teaching profession. Some people say teachers lack the capacity and expertise to deliver on autonomy. There may be some truth in that. But simply perpetuating a prescriptive model of teaching will not produce creative teachers: those trained only to reheat pre-cooked hamburgers are unlikely to become master chefs.

By contrast, when teachers feel a sense of ownership over their classrooms, when students feel a sense of ownership over their learning, that is when productive teaching takes place. But most important, teachers must assume ownership of the profession because of the pace of change in 21st-century school systems. Even the most urgent efforts to translate a government-established curriculum into classroom practice typically drag out over a decade, because it takes so much time to communicate the goals and methods through the different layers of the system. This slow implementation process leads to a widening gap between what students need to learn, and what and how teachers teach.

However, education systems often face tensions between granting teachers’ professional autonomy and holding them accountable for the decisions they make. Indeed, TALIS data show that the level of autonomy afforded to teachers varies considerably across countries. For example, fewer than 30% of lower secondary teachers have significant responsibility to choose the learning materials they use in lessons in Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Japan, Morocco and Uzbekistan. In contrast, the share is above 90% in Denmark, Estonia, Iceland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and Slovenia, according to principals’ reports. So how much freedom should teachers have in the classroom?

According to TALIS data, teachers who report higher levels of autonomy in designing lessons and teaching methods tend to feel more confident in managing classrooms and delivering lessons. More autonomy also correlates with higher job satisfaction, lower stress and greater confidence in adapting lessons to students’ needs, in most cases by a large margin.

This seems to suggest that greater teacher autonomy is a good thing. However, TALIS only tells us there is a correlation. Not what the driving factor is. For example, confidence could be the main reason why teachers act more autonomously and are less stressed.

It is also important to note that the data show a stronger link between autonomy and self-efficacy among experienced teachers. Educators who have spent ten years or more in front of a blackboard tend to flourish when they are free to tailor their approach. In contrast, too much autonomy for novice teachers, who might lack support structures, could have a negative impact.

How should policymakers respond? While autonomy is often championed as an important component of teaching, that should not mean a lack of coherence in practice. Idiosyncratic or unscientific methods risk undermining student outcomes and the credibility of teachers. It is important for policymakers to promote a shared professional culture grounded in evidence-based practice. Education systems should consider which teachers are granted more freedom and under what circumstances. A teacher’s profile – their experience, confidence and competence – should inform decisions about autonomy. For example, a novice teacher may need structure and mentorship before being expected to exercise autonomy.

Countries have confronted these issues in different ways. In Slovenia, for example, a decade-long reform of upper secondary education saw teachers gradually take on greater responsibility for whole-school planning and implementation. This meant that teachers had considerable autonomy to shape classroom practices. At the same time, accountability was built into the system through shared strategic goals and national resources to guide teachers’ work.

Colombia has embedded teacher involvement by allowing teachers to participate in educational governing bodies, giving them a say on curriculum and policy. The country has also strengthened teacher autonomy through five annual weeks dedicated to institutional development. In this time, teachers can work on teaching practices as well as their school’s planning and partnerships. These examples of structured programmes balance freedom with shared responsibility. They create space for teacher-led initiatives to work alongside broader educational goals.

But allowing freedom in the classroom should not mean a lack of oversight. And at the moment, there is sometimes insufficient oversight in countries where teacher autonomy is high. For example, in Italy and Norway, where many teachers report having substantial instructional autonomy, about one in four have never been appraised. In Finland, the share exceeds one third. Education leaders, effectively, may not really know what teachers are doing in the classroom.

This can have serious implications. Successful accountability systems allow teachers to innovate while maintaining clear benchmarks for success. Policymakers need to cultivate environments for teachers to work together to frame good practice, such as through classroom observation and professional learning communities. This will ensure that autonomy is exercised collaboratively and responsibly; and help legitimise instructional autonomy while maintaining standards.

Figure 14. At the school level, teachers are more involved in decisions related to instruction

Share of teachers in schools where they have a significant responsibility for…

*Estimates should be interpreted with caution due to higher risk of non-response bias.

Note: Results based on responses of principals.

Source: OECD, TALIS 2024 Database, Table 5.1.

However, if accountability systems go too far, they can have a negative impact. When systems become punitive or disconnected from real classroom work, they can limit and undermine autonomy altogether. That, in turn, can breed an atmosphere of compliance, rather than creativity, and harm the quality of teaching.

This does not mean that we should take freedom as an argument to be idiosyncratic. If you were an airline pilot and you announced to passengers that, although you were taught to land against the wind, you felt like trying to land with the wind, they would understandably become anxious. In a similar way, school leaders face the challenge of balancing teachers’ desire to try new or unconventional approaches with the responsibility to ensure that practice remain safe, evidence-based and effective. As many areas of teaching still lack clear standards of practice, teachers may infer that complete autonomy should apply in all areas, even in those where the evidence base is well established. As a result, when there is no common agreement on professional practice, teachers may feel disempowered when leaders steer them towards particular evidence-informed approaches.

Finding out which pedagogical approaches work best in specific contexts takes time, investment in research, and collaboration so that good ideas can spread and be scaled across the profession. Achieving that will require a major shift from an industrial work organisation to a truly professional work organisation for teachers and school leaders, in which professional norms of control replace bureaucratic and administrative forms of control. In turn, more professional discretion accorded to teachers will allow them greater latitude in developing student creativity and critical thinking skills that are central to success in the 21st century, and that are much harder to develop in highly prescriptive learning environments. Supporting such a shift is what we should expect from 21st-century education policy.

Figure 15. Autonomy needs to be accompanied by accountability

Share of teachers who report having “substantial” or “full autonomy” in implementing the curriculum flexibly and who have never been appraised

*Estimates should be interpreted with caution due to higher risk of non-response bias.

Note: Results based on responses of principals.

Source: OECD, TALIS 2024 Database, Table 5.1.

Figure 16. Teachers’ autonomy varies by task

Share of teachers having “substantial” or “full” autonomy over the following aspects of planning and teaching

*Estimates should be interpreted with caution due to higher risk of non-response bias.

Note: Results refer to tasks teachers perform for a class randomly selected from their current weekly timetable during the week preceding the survey.

Source: OECD, TALIS 2024 Database, Table 5.31.

Teaching is becoming more of a team sport

While professional autonomy is important, without a collaborative culture it can lead to fragmentation, isolation and idiosyncratic practice.

The benefits of teacher collaboration have long been trumpeted by policymakers. Creating lesson plans together, co-developing assessments and reflecting on classroom practice are ways to improve the quality of teaching and student outcomes, according to extensive research. So education leaders will be happy to see that teachers are spending more time working together. Indeed, according to TALIS, full-time teachers report spending just over 3 hours per week participating in teamwork and dialogue with colleagues, on average across the OECD. Some countries have seen a particularly big jump. Brazil, for example, has leaped from 3.5 hours in 2018 to 5 hours in 2024.

TALIS asked teachers how often they collaborate; tasks such as team teaching and sharing teaching materials. Across the OECD, 31% of teachers report teaching jointly as a team. The proportion is particularly high in some countries. In Austria, Azerbaijan, Denmark, Italy, Japan and Uzbekistan the share of teachers engaged in team teaching is 50% or more. In Viet Nam the figure is 69%. In contrast, less than 10% of teachers in Bulgaria, Cyprus, Lithuania, Malta, Montenegro and Morocco teach jointly in the same class. In Croatia, the figure is a paltry 3%.

Figure 17. Teachers are cooperating more

Hours per week spent by full-time teachers on teamwork and dialogue with other teachers

*Estimates should be interpreted with caution due to higher risk of non-response bias.

Note: The analysis is restricted to full-time teachers.

Source: OECD, TALIS 2018 and TALIS 2024 Databases, Table 6.2.

Figure 18. Team teaching has become more common

Share of teachers who teach jointly as a team in the same class at least once a month

*Estimates should be interpreted with caution due to higher risk of non-response bias.

Source: OECD, TALIS 2018 and TALIS 2024 Databases, Table 6.7.

These statistics reveal how far some countries have progressed in this area, while others lag behind. This is important because the more teachers take part in training, the more confident they feel about teaching. They are also more likely to use teaching methods that get students thinking and actively involved. OECD data show teachers who work closely with their colleagues tend to use these strategies more often.

This suggests that when teachers share ideas, visit each other’s classrooms, and support one another, they are more likely to use effective teaching strategies. As a result, schools should encourage teachers to work together and engage in professional networks, rather than work alone. Teachers who collaborate more often also show higher levels of job satisfaction.

Figure 19. Teachers cooperate in different ways

Share of teachers who do… at least once per month

*Estimates should be interpreted with caution due to higher risk of non-response bias.

Source: OECD, TALIS 2018 and TALIS 2024 Databases, Table 6.3.

There are other areas where TALIS data reveal a lack of co-operation. Only 9% of teachers, on average across the OECD, observe other teachers’ classes and provide feedback. And 46% exchange teaching materials with colleagues monthly or more, although female teachers are more likely to do so than their male counterparts. Despite the evidence that teamwork among teachers is a good thing, the reality inside many schools remains stubbornly solitary.

Why is this the case? There are many reasons. Time is the most obvious constraint. School schedules are notoriously rigid, and carving out hours for collaboration often means sacrificing instructional time or could mean teachers work unpaid. Cultural norms also play a role. In some countries, hierarchy and deference to seniority are deeply ingrained, which may mean younger teachers hesitate to critique or co-plan with more experienced colleagues. In others, those who embrace teacher autonomy might resist teamwork. Teaching is often seen as a craft, honed through personal experience and individual flair. Asking teachers to expose their practice to scrutiny could feel like an affront to their professional identity.

Figure 20. The average age of teachers increased in many education systems between 2018 and 2024

Average age of lower secondary teachers

*Estimates should be interpreted with caution due to higher risk of non-response bias.

Source: OECD, TALIS 2018 and TALIS 2024 Databases, Table 1.4.

Looking ahead, if education systems are serious about improving outcomes, they should bolster collaboration. That means rethinking timetables, investing in training, and cultivating cultures of trust. It also means recognising that teamwork is not an add-on, but a core component of being a teacher.

Many teachers and schools are ready for this shift. To encourage their growth, policy needs to inspire and enable innovation, and identify and share best practice. That shift in policy will need to be built on trust: trust in education, in educational institutions, in schools and teachers, in students and communities. In all public services, trust is an essential part of good governance. Successful schools will always be places where people want to work, and where ideas can flourish, and where trust is both offered and received.

We know too little about how trust is developed in education, how it is sustained over time, or how it can be restored if broken. But trust cannot be legislated or mandated; that is why it is so hard to build into traditional administrative structures. Trust must be intentional. It can only be nurtured and inspired through healthy relationships and constructive transparency. At a time when command-and-control systems are weakening, building trust is the most promising way to advance and fuel modern education systems.

How to ensure young teachers want to stay in the classroom

In many OECD countries, the ageing of the teaching workforce is a growing concern. A significant proportion of educators are nearing retirement age, which threatens to create staff shortages. For example, lower secondary teachers in Lithuania, Portugal and Latvia are over 50 years-old, on average, according to TALIS data (the OECD average is 45). This demographic trend puts pressure on these education systems to hire younger teachers and to ensure they receive enough support to maintain teaching standards. But some of these countries are also struggling with high numbers of young teachers quitting. What can be done in those contexts to ensure young teachers stay in the classroom?

TALIS data suggest some countries are finding better policy solutions than others. Fewer than 10% of teachers under the age of 30 intend to leave teaching in the next five years in Azerbaijan, Italy, Spain and Sweden (countries where the average age of teachers is at least 45 years old). This share is half the OECD average and four times less than the percentage who want to leave in Latvia (53%), Lithuania (50%) and Estonia (49%).

There is no magic bullet and one-size-fits all solution but countries can take inspiration from each other. In Italy, for example, where the average teacher is 48 years old, policymakers have begun to make strides in retaining younger teaching talent. Reforms have focused on improving job stability by offering clearer career progression and merit-based components to teachers’ salaries. Compulsory professional development opportunities have also helped new teachers build confidence and competence early on. Italy is one of only a handful of countries that have seen a decrease in the average teacher age in lower secondary schools.

Iceland, where the average age of teachers is 46, is another country where policymakers recognised they faced a looming teacher shortage, particularly in rural and remote areas. Enrolment in teacher education had declined with just 165 new teachers graduating in 2019. A five-year initiative to tackle the issue included streamlining teacher education with a flexible master’s programme, easing hiring rules, and boosting financial support for student teachers through paid placements and graduation grants. Since then, Iceland has seen a 160% increase in teacher graduations compared to the previous five-year average – with 454 teachers graduating in 2022.

These initiatives show that targeted actions can make a difference. In contrast, the Baltic states have struggled to find an effective response. They face the twin challenges of an ageing teacher population and vast numbers of early-career teachers planning to leave the profession. Low pay and limited support contribute to this situation. The three Baltic countries also have the lowest share of male teachers in the world.

Part of the issue might also be that teachers do not feel valued by society. In Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, only around 20% of lower secondary teachers believe the teaching profession is valued. TALIS data show that teachers who do not feel valued are more likely to consider quitting. In addition, younger generations are increasingly less likely to stay in one profession throughout their working lives. This is partly driven by digitalisation, giving people more flexible career options, including greater opportunities for remote and freelance work. This trend affects all professions, including teachers.

This is not necessarily a bad development. Turnover can introduce fresh ideas. It also naturally

filters out teachers who may lack motivation, improving overall teaching quality. But schools need to rethink how they attract and retain high-quality teachers. Improving professional development opportunities for mid-career teachers is a no-brainer. Providing clearer advancements is likely more sustainable than endlessly recruiting replacement teachers. Education leaders should also develop policies that encourage people in other careers to take up teaching. Iceland, for example, has the highest share of second career teachers in the world – people who became teachers after a significant amount of time in a different job. Flexible teaching options could be a benefit here, such as guest-lecturing. This would help attract professionals who wish to contribute but who cannot fully commit to a traditional teaching schedule.

Ultimately, education leaders must not bury their heads in the sand and simply hope schools will be able to hire new teachers when required. This is a policy matter, and policymakers need to act. If they do not, some education systems risk chronic teacher shortages, which will stretch resources and harm students’ academic development and prospects.

Attracting the most talented teachers to the most challenging classrooms

TALIS data and other research show that more experienced teachers are more likely to meet their lesson aims. So, imagine a world where the most experienced, older teachers work in the most challenging classrooms. Where seasoned educators teach students with the toughest social and academic prospects.

The concept makes sense. And in many countries assessed by TALIS, there is a relative balance. However, in certain education systems, young teachers aged under 30 disproportionately report working in the most demanding classroom environments. In comparison, older, more experienced teachers often seem to get the opportunity to work in less challenging schools.

TALIS data reveal some especially large gaps. For example, in Bahrain, Colombia, Israel and United Arab Emirates, the share of teachers under 30 who report working with students with language difficulties is 15 percentage points higher than that of their older colleagues. Younger teachers are also more likely to say they work with students presenting special education needs in 15 out of 53 systems surveyed by TALIS. The gap is largest in the Netherlands, where 73% of younger teachers report teaching classes with a high share of students with special needs - 19 percentage points higher than their older colleagues.

A similar pattern is observed for behavioural problems. In most education systems, younger teachers are significantly more likely than older colleagues to report that over 10% of their students have anti-social or disruptive behaviour. The difference is 25 percentage points in Latvia and Portugal. However, one interpretation of the data could be that older teachers are better equipped to handle bad behaviour, so report it as less of an issue.

These disparities not only negatively affect young teachers, but also students, and ultimately the entire education system more broadly. Younger, inexperienced teachers are more likely to be confronted with challenging classrooms during a period when they are still developing their class management skills and confidence. Almost one in three novice teachers report needing training focused on classroom management, on average, more than the share of experienced teachers. On top of this, new teachers will sometimes have to operate with limited support systems. These circumstances increase the odds of young teachers burning out or abandoning the profession altogether. In turn, students in demanding classrooms, who are already disadvantaged by circumstance, may see their teachers struggle or quit. This inevitably creates a cycle of instability and undermines long-term strategies to improve educational outcomes.

This mismatch between the complexity of teaching contexts and the preparedness of new teachers underlines the need for smart deployment strategies and targeted support. So what can policymakers do? Some countries offer compelling policy ideas. In Japan, for example, teachers are expected to rotate schools throughout their careers. This is to ensure that all schools have access to effective teachers and a balance of experienced and novice teachers. In Korea, a mandatory rotation system requires teachers to move to a different school every five years. Incentives - such as extra pay, smaller classes and the ability to choose the next school where one works – are also used to attract skilled educators to the most challenging schools. Pairing high- and low-performing schools can also be beneficial. In Shanghai, for example, the “empowered management programme” allows teachers and school leaders from both types of schools to work together, including observing classes and discussing effective practices.

Many OECD countries have brought in targeted financial incentives to encourage teachers to work in schools perceived as more difficult working environments. These “pay rewards”, if well designed, can help encourage teachers to work in tougher schools and can be more cost efficient than across-the-board salary incentives. However, while bonuses and salary increases may draw teachers to hard-to-staff schools, they do not guarantee retention or sustained performance.

More effective strategies tend to combine career incentives with robust support mechanisms. For example, offering accelerated career progression, leadership opportunities or access to advanced professional development can be more motivating than financial rewards. Policymakers need to rethink how they organise schools and empower educators. They must also not neglect the basics: developing a positive work environment and providing sufficient resources, supportive leadership and collaboration among staff. All of these have been shown to boost teacher satisfaction and retention.

Countries like Singapore and New Zealand have introduced differentiated career tracks that allow teachers to advance while staying in the classroom, rather than taking on administrative roles. Other strategies, such as less class-contact time or smaller classes, are also worth considering for schools in difficult areas or that have specific education needs. Technology can also help, especially in remote or underserved regions where teacher expertise is limited. Digital platforms can bring high-quality instruction to students regardless of geography, enabling remote schools to benefit from “master teachers” through live-streamed lessons, virtual mentoring and shared digital resources.

Looking ahead, education leaders need to promote the idea that it is a smart career move for experienced teachers to work in the toughest schools. For long-term success, policymakers must go beyond attracting teachers to the profession. They need to make disadvantaged schools places where teachers feel valued, supported and rewarded. At the moment, veteran teachers sometimes gravitate toward institutions with higher academic reputations, better resources and lighter workloads. Without greater incentives, that situation is not going to change.

Figure 21. Novice teachers are often allocated to more difficult environments

Share of teachers with more than 10% of students with difficulties in understanding the language of instruction

*Estimates should be interpreted with caution due to higher risk of non-response bias.

Note: Older teachers refer to those aged 50 and above. Younger teachers refer to those under age 30. Results refer to lessons taught to a class randomly selected from teachers’ current weekly timetables during the week preceding the survey.

Source: OECD, TALIS 2024 Database, Table 3.25.