Results from TALIS Starting Strong 2024

Reader’s Guide

Countries and subnational entities

In tables, countries and subnational entities are sorted in alphabetical order, with one exception: New Zealand’s data represent only respondents included in the sample and not the full national population targeted by the survey. As such, they are placed at the bottom of tables for each level of ECEC and annotated (**) in tables, figures and the text.

One note is added to the information on the data for Israel:

• The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities. The use of such data by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and Israeli settlements in the West Bank under the terms of international law.

High exclusion rates

For reasons of practicality, safety or economy (e.g. remote schools, unique demographic groups, school types, areas under civil unrest, natural catastrophe), the national survey population could be reduced by no more than 5% of the international target population of staff for the relevant level of ECEC (pre-primary or settings for children under age 3). However, not all countries and subnational entities could adhere to this rule:

• Germany: home-based settings (6.5% of staff) were excluded from the sample of settings for children under age 3.

• Israel: ultra-Orthodox settings (26.3% of settings) were excluded from the sample of pre-primary settings; the resulting staff exclusion rate is unknown.

• New Zealand: Te Kōhanga Reo (Māori language immersion environment for children and families) were excluded at both levels of ECEC (12.8% of pre-primary staff and 12.9% of staff in settings for children under age 3). Free kindergartens (3.1% of staff) and playcentres (13.8% of staff) were also excluded from the sample of settings for children under age 3.

Low response rates

Low response rates are a potential source of non-response bias. Non-response bias can occur if non‑respondents are systematically different (in terms of their level of education, for example) from those who agree to participate in the survey.

Achieving strong survey response rates is a growing challenge around the world. In addition, the nature of the ECEC sector in many countries creates further challenges for surveying this population. For instance, in many countries, the ECEC system is fragmented, with oversight and responsibility for the sector spread across several ministries and across levels of governance, with municipalities often having an important role. This creates challenges for even establishing a sampling frame at the national level in many places (as reflected in the high exclusion rates, in some cases) and complicates the process of contacting ECEC settings once the frame has been established. In addition, the private sector has a significant role in providing ECEC in many countries, which can limit the ability of central authorities to motivate participation. These challenges are compounded by the fact that countries often face ECEC staff shortages and ECEC settings are typically small: these features place an additional strain on recruiting ECEC settings to participate, as ECEC leaders may be wary of asking their staff to take the time to complete a survey.

Despite the many challenges, countries and subnational entities participating in TALIS Starting Strong 2024 invested important efforts in reaching their populations of ECEC staff and leaders, ultimately achieving a range of response rates (see Annex B). Nonetheless, data for ECEC systems that did not meet technical standards with respect to response rates are annotated (*) in tables and figures:

• pre-primary settings (ISCED level 02): Germany, Ireland and Norway

• settings for children under age 3: the Flemish Community of Belgium, Ireland, New Brunswick (Canada), Norway and Quebec (Canada).

New Zealand also did not meet the TALIS 2024 technical standards with respect to participation rates; data from New Zealand are annotated separately (**) due to sparse responses that led to unanticipated exclusions for some segments of the target population, as described above. As a result of these broad exclusions, the samples could not be adequately adjusted to represent ECEC settings and staff in New Zealand overall (see Annexes B and C). For these reasons, the respondents in the samples from New Zealand represent only respondents included in the sample and not ECEC staff and settings from the whole country. In all other countries and subnational entities included in this report, data are weighted to represent the full population targeted by the survey; that is, the samples are constructed to be representative of ECEC staff and settings in the whole country or subnational entity.

Countries and subnational entities undertook non-response bias analyses to understand the likelihood of bias in the TALIS Starting Strong 2024 samples. These non-response bias analyses did not suggest a direct link between the levels of response rates and the likelihood of bias in the samples, although in many instances this was difficult to estimate due to a lack of data on ECEC staff and leaders from sources other than TALIS Starting Strong. Given the limited data available from or about the population of ECEC staff and leaders targeted by TALIS Starting Strong, information from all participating countries and subnational entities is presented in this report, despite not achieving the technical standards with respect to participation rates for all samples. All other technical standards were met (OECD, forthcoming[2]).

Although countries and subnational entities are flagged (*) only in tables and figures and not in the text of this report (with the exception of New Zealand**), caution is required when interpreting estimates for samples that did not meet the TALIS technical standards with respect to response rates due to a higher risk of non-response bias.

Reporting conventions

Classification of levels of education and early childhood education and care

The classification of ECEC settings as pre-primary, as well as the other levels of education described in this volume, is based on the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED). ISCED is an instrument for compiling statistics on education internationally. ISCED-2011 is the basis of the levels presented in this publication. It distinguishes the following levels of education:

• early childhood education (ISCED level 0)

  • early childhood educational development (ISCED level 01)

  • pre-primary education (ISCED level 02)

• primary education (ISCED level 1)

• lower secondary education (ISCED level 2)

• upper secondary education (ISCED level 3)

• post-secondary non-tertiary education (ISCED level 4)

• short-cycle tertiary education (ISCED level 5)

• bachelor’s or equivalent (ISCED level 6)

• master’s or equivalent (ISCED level 7)

• doctoral or equivalent (ISCED level 8).

Within early childhood education (ISCED level 0), settings classified under ISCED-2011 have an intentional educational component and aim to develop cognitive, physical and socio-emotional skills necessary for participation in school and society. Programmes at this level are often differentiated by age, with early childhood educational development serving children under age 3 and pre-primary education serving children from age 3 until entry into primary school. Pre-primary settings in TALIS Starting Strong meet the ISCED-2011 definition for ISCED level 02. Settings serving children under age 3 in TALIS Starting Strong were not required to meet the ISCED-2011 definition for ISCED level 01.

Despite the distinction made by ISCED-2011 within ISCED level 0, many countries and subnational entities, including several participating in TALIS Starting Strong, have an integrated ECEC system (see Annex A). In integrated ECEC systems, programmes from birth or age 1 until entry into primary school are offered together, generally with the same government oversight. For countries and subnational entities with integrated ECEC systems, the TALIS Starting Strong sampling strategy randomly split ECEC programmes that were expected to cover both age groups to be included in the sampling universe for one population of interest or the other. In this way, programmes could be sampled as part of the pre-primary sample or as part of the sample of settings for children under age 3, but the same programme would not be sampled for both levels of ECEC.

Next, staff were sampled within these settings if they were serving children within the designated level of ECEC (see Annex B). As a result, the sample of pre-primary staff and leaders is representative of staff and settings providing pre-primary education across all 15 participating countries and subnational entities, regardless of whether an integrated system exists or not. Similarly, the sample of staff and leaders in settings for children under age 3 is representative of staff and settings providing services for this age group across all eight participating countries and subnational entities, regardless of whether an integrated system exists or not. Settings may also serve younger or older children, in addition to the level of ECEC for which they were sampled, regardless of whether the ECEC system overall is integrated. Throughout this volume, results are described according to whether they are from the pre-primary sample or the sample of settings for children under age 3, although this may not reflect the organisation of the overall ECEC system or the mix of ages of children served in a particular setting. When not otherwise specified, findings refer to both levels of ECEC (i.e. pre-primary and settings for children under age 3).

Settings

The report uses the term “settings” as shorthand to describe all ECEC settings, at both levels of ECEC. The specific programmes or settings vary across and within countries (see Annex A for details on the types of settings in each participating country and subnational entity).

All officially registered, centre-based pre-primary programmes and all officially registered, centre- and home-based programmes serving children under age 3 in each participating country and subnational entity were considered in-scope for the TALIS Starting Strong 2024 sample. Home-based settings were not part of the population targeted by the survey at the pre-primary level (ISCED 02). However, in many countries and subnational entities, older children may also attend home-based ECEC settings.

Data were collected in home-based settings for children under age 3 in the Flemish Community of Belgium, Israel, New Brunswick (Canada), New Zealand** and Quebec (Canada) (Table 1). These settings typically involve a single staff member working at home with a small group of children, although there is wide variation in how this type of ECEC is organised, regulated and delivered to families. In contrast, centre‑based settings generally include multiple classrooms/playrooms and staff members working in teams in facilities designed for group-based care, such as early learning centres, crèches, kindergartens, preschools or schools. Centre- and home-based settings often have important differences in their management, financing and size in terms of the number of children served, among others. When interpreting TALIS Starting Strong 2024 results for the five countries and subnational entities that include a mix of centre- and home-based settings, it is important to bear in mind this mixed composition of the samples.

Table 1. Types of early childhood education and care settings for children under age 3 and their staff in TALIS Starting Strong 2024

Percentage of staff working in centre- and home-based settings and of centre- and home-based settings, based on sampling information for respondents

	Percentage of staff, from staff responses		Percentage of settings, from leader responses
	Centre-based settings	Home-based settings	Centre-based settings	Home-based settings
Flemish Community (Belgium)*	81.3	18.7	41.3	58.7
Germany	100.0	0.0	100.0	0.0
Ireland*	100.0	0.0	100.0	0.0
Israel	88.6	11.4	49.7	50.3
New Brunswick (Canada)*	95.3	4.7	77.6	22.4
Norway*	100.0	0.0	100.0	0.0
Quebec (Canada)*	83.4	16.6	32.6	67.4
New Zealand**	97.6	2.4	96.8	3.2

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

** Data only represent respondents included in the sample and not the population targeted by the survey. For more information, see Annex B.

Notes: Staff and leaders who responded to the main or short version of the combined questionnaire (CQM or CQS) are included in the percentage of both staff and leaders in this table.

Type of ECEC setting was identified based on the sampling frame and weighted according to data collected from respondents. Home-based data were not included in the sampling frame for Germany, Ireland or Norway. For more information, see Annexes B and C.

Source: OECD (2025), TALIS Starting Strong 2024 Database, Table D.3.1

Staff and leaders

The report uses the term “staff” as shorthand for the TALIS Starting Strong population of teachers, assistants, staff for individual children, staff for special tasks, interns and any other type of ECEC staff working regularly in a pedagogical way, providing learning opportunities or care, with children. Staff were asked to report on the role that best describes their work at their ECEC setting. Response options were translated and adapted to meet the needs of participating ECEC systems and these terms were mapped to the seven international categories of staff (Table 2): leaders, teachers, assistants, staff for individual children, staff for special tasks, interns and other. In some systems, a direct translation of the international terms may not fully align with how staff describe themselves in their local language, for instance when the term “teacher” is not typically used to describe ECEC staff despite their primary responsibility for the care and education of a group of children.

Table 2. Early childhood education and care staff roles in the TALIS Starting Strong 2024 questionnaire

International staff categories and their descriptions as provided in the English source version of the staff questionnaire

ECEC setting leader	Individuals with the most responsibility for the administrative, managerial and/or pedagogical leadership at the ECEC setting
Teacher	Individuals responsible for the care and education of a group of children (e.g. educators)
Assistant	Individuals assisting with the care and education of children (e.g. assistants, auxiliary staff)
Staff for individual children	Individuals responsible for the care and education of specific children (e.g. integration aides, special needs assistants)
Staff for special tasks	Individuals responsible for specific subjects (e.g. music or physical education teachers)
Intern	Individuals acquiring further qualifications while working
Other	-

Note: This question was only included for respondents who received the staff questionnaire or the short version of the combined questionnaire. Respondents identified as the person with the most responsibility for administrative, managerial and/or pedagogical leadership in their setting (i.e. the “leader”) during the sampling process did not receive this question.

Source: OECD (2025[3]), TALIS Starting Strong 2024 Questionnaires.

The report uses the term “leader” to identify the person who was identified as having the most responsibility for administrative, managerial and/or pedagogical leadership in their setting. In addition, leaders who also had staff duties (i.e. those who worked regularly in a pedagogical way with children in addition to their leadership roles, and those working alone) are included in both staff and leader data throughout this report, where possible.

Responses from staff and leaders come from four different questionnaire versions. The leader questionnaire (LQ) was given to the one individual identified during the sampling process as having the most responsibility for the administrative, managerial and/or pedagogical leadership at the ECEC setting. The staff questionnaire (SQ) was given to individuals with direct responsibilities (either on their own or in co-operation with colleagues) for the education and/or care of children in the ECEC setting. The main combined questionnaire (CQM) was used for leaders with staff duties, whereas the short version of the combined questionnaire (CQS) was used for respondents working alone (i.e. in one-person settings). The CQM and CQS include survey questions from the leader and staff questionnaires; respondents who answered either the CQM or CQS are included in the staff and leader data (see OECD (forthcoming[2]), for more information). Countries and subnational entities could choose to use either the CQM or the CQS or both, to best match the profiles of ECEC staff and leaders in their contexts (Table 3).

Table 3. Use of different questionnaire types in TALIS Starting Strong 2024

Percentage of staff’s and leaders’ responses collected by questionnaire type

	Staff responses			Leader responses
	Staff questionnaire (SQ)	Combined questionnaire main (CQM)	Combined questionnaire short (CQS)	Leader questionnaire (LQ)	Combined questionnaire main (CQM)	Combined questionnaire short (CQS)
Pre-primary settings (ISCED level 02)
Chile	97.0	3.0	0.0	82.2	17.8	0.0
Colombia	83.8	2.0	14.2	64.9	4.1	31.0
Denmark	92.7	7.3	0.0	38.9	61.1	0.0
Finland	98.7	1.3	0.0	84.3	15.7	0.0
Flemish Community (Belgium)	100.0	0.0	0.0	100.0	0.0	0.0
Germany*	94.2	5.8	0.0	44.6	55.4	0.0
Ireland*	91.6	7.6	0.7	58.3	37.6	4.0
Israel	71.5	28.4	0.0	0.0	99.6	0.4
Japan	100.0	0.0	0.0	100.0	0.0	0.0
Morocco	90.3	3.6	6.1	78.5	7.7	13.8
Norway*	98.2	1.8	0.0	86.1	13.9	0.0
Spain	97.5	2.5	0.0	77.2	22.8	0.0
Sweden	100.0	0.0	0.0	100.0	0.0	0.0
Türkiye	100.0	0.0	0.0	100.0	0.0	0.0
New Zealand**	85.8	14.2	0.0	28.8	71.2	0.0
Settings for children under age 3
Flemish Community (Belgium)*	94.9	4.2	1.0	82.1	14.8	3.1
Germany	91.8	8.2	0.0	41.6	58.4	0.0
Ireland*	94.2	4.8	1.0	66.8	26.6	6.6
Israel	77.4	11.1	11.5	0.0	49.4	50.6
New Brunswick (Canada)*	93.4	1.9	4.7	67.6	10.0	22.4
Norway*	98.7	1.3	0.0	88.0	12.0	0.0
Quebec (Canada)*	82.6	0.8	16.6	29.6	3.0	67.4
New Zealand**	87.2	12.8	0.0	37.1	62.9	0.0

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

** Data only represent respondents included in the sample and not the population targeted by the survey. For more information, see Annex B.

Note: Percentages are weighted (see Annex C).

Source: OECD (2025), TALIS Starting Strong 2024 Database, Table D.3.1.

Leaders, whether responding to the LQ, CQM or CQS, provided information on the characteristics of their settings and their own work and working conditions. Where responses from leaders are presented in this report, they are usually weighted to be representative of ECEC settings. In some cases, leader responses are treated as attributes of staff working conditions (e.g. the size of the ECEC setting where staff work). In such cases, leaders’ answers are analysed at the staff level and weighted to be representative of staff (see Annex C).

Results are presented only when estimates are based on at least 30 staff and/or 10 settings/leaders.

Self-reported data

TALIS Starting Strong results are based exclusively on self-reports from staff and leaders and, therefore, represent their opinions, perceptions, beliefs and accounts of their activities. As with any self-reported data, this information is subjective and may, therefore, differ from data collected through other means (e.g. administrative data or observations). The same is true of leaders’ reports about setting characteristics and practices, which may differ from descriptions provided by administrative data at a national, subnational, regional or local government level.

While self-reported data allow respondents to share their beliefs and perceptions, there are also limitations when interpreting findings based on self-reported information:

• Cultural response patterns: Social and cultural backgrounds might systematically affect how individuals respond to questions (e.g. tending to respond in moderate or extreme ways) (van de Vijver and Leung, 1997[4]).

• Social desirability bias: Individuals respond in ways that they think are viewed favourably but do not represent their true beliefs or actions (Krumpal, 2011[5]).

• Validity concerns: Respondents might have to remember something that occurred a long time in the past, or their interpretation of a question is not consistent.

As a result, direct comparisons across countries and subnational entities using self-reported measures warrant caution.

Abbreviations

Coef.	Linear regression coefficient
Dif.	Mean difference
ECEC	Early childhood education and care
ISCED	International Standard Classification of Education
PPP	Purchasing power parity
S.D.	Standard deviation
S.E.	Standard error
% dif.	Percentage-point difference

Technical information

Causality

TALIS Starting Strong is not designed to establish causal relationships between two variables. All analysis presented in this report should be interpreted as uncovering the presence (or absence) of statistical association, i.e. whether or not variation in one variable (for instance, staff participation in professional development) is systematically associated with variation in another variable (for instance, self‑efficacy in working with children). These associations do not reflect a causality between two variables, i.e. whether making staff participate in professional development, all other things being kept equal, would cause a change in self-efficacy.

Symbols used in tables

Four symbols are used to denote non-reported estimates:

• a: The question was not administered in the country or subnational entity.

• c: There were too few observations to provide reliable estimates (i.e. there were fewer than 30 staff or fewer than 10 settings/leaders with valid data).

  • Note: In the case of simple tables (e.g. Table Staff.3), the number of observations is evaluated for the entire question, regardless of the distribution of observations across response categories. In the case of contingency tables, where two or more questions are combined for reporting (e.g. Table D.2.4), the number of observations is evaluated for each combination of categories individually. The sole exception to this rule is reporting on staff and leader gender: only the percent of female staff is reported in Tables Staff.1 and Leader.1.

• m: Data were collected but not included in the publication for technical reasons (e.g. there was no observation in the sample). Wherever a particular response option within the variable of interest was not selected by any respondent, a 0 is reported. In the case of contingency tables where there is no respondent in one of the disaggregated categories, the estimate for the variable of interest for that category is reported as “m,” rather than 0.

• w: Data were withdrawn at the request of the country or subnational entity concerned.

Rounding figures

Because of rounding, some figures in tables may not add up exactly to the totals. Totals, differences and averages are always calculated on the basis of exact numbers and are rounded only after calculation.

All standard errors in this publication have been rounded to one or two decimal places. Where the value 0.0 or 0.00 is shown, this does not imply that the standard error is zero, but that it is smaller than 0.05 or 0.005, respectively.

Standard errors

The statistics in this report represent estimates based on samples of staff and setting leaders, rather than values that could be calculated if every staff member and leader in every country or subnational entity had responded to the survey. Standard errors measure the degree of uncertainty of the estimates and are available in all annex tables (see Annexes C and D). To simplify the presentation of results and enhance readability, estimates reported in the text of this volume do not show the standard errors.

Focusing on statistically significant differences

This volume focuses on statistically significant values or differences, both from bivariate analyses and multivariable regressions. Statistically significant values are principally denoted in darker colours in figures and in bold font in tables. Unless otherwise specified, the significance level is set to 5%. See Annex C for further information.

Further technical documentation

For further information on TALIS Starting Strong documentation, instruments and methodology, see the TALIS 2024 Technical Report (OECD, forthcoming[2]) and the TALIS 2024 User Guide (OECD, forthcoming[6]).

Annex D provides a list of the tables of results referred to throughout the report. This report uses the OECD StatLinks service. All tables and charts are assigned a URL leading to a corresponding Excel^TM workbook containing the underlying data. These URLs are stable and will remain unchanged over time. In addition, readers of the e-books will be able to click directly on these links and the workbook will open in a separate window if their Internet browser is open and running.

Content of this report

This report is organised as follows:

• Chapter 1 provides an overview of results from TALIS Starting Strong 2024, highlighting ways to strengthen ECEC for the future.

• Chapter 2 provides an overview of the profiles of staff and leaders who work in the ECEC sector.

• Chapter 3 examines characteristics of ECEC settings across the participating countries and subnational entities.

• Chapter 4 investigates how ECEC staff spend their time and the different types of practices they report using to support children’s development, learning and well-being.

• Chapter 5 looks at the practices used to promote awareness and acceptance of diversity as well to engage with families in ECEC settings.

• Chapter 6 considers opportunities for and barriers to professional development for ECEC staff to build on their initial education and training.

• Chapter 7 examines how leaders are prepared and supported to work with staff and shape high‑quality practices with children in their ECEC settings.

• Chapter 8 discusses the capacity of the ECEC sector to attract and retain a high-quality workforce, looking in particular at job satisfaction, emotional and physical well-being, and sources of work-related stress.

• Chapter 9 explores areas for strengthening the capacity of ECEC to respond to complex and shifting demands, highlighting co-operation with other actors and services, professional collaboration, monitoring practices, digital preparedness and strategies to cope with unexpected disruptions.

• Annex A contains information about the ECEC system in each participating country and subnational entity.

• Annex B contains information about the TALIS Starting Strong target populations, the samples and a summary of the adjudication outcomes for each sample, along with cautionary notes about the interpretations of results, whenever necessary.

• Annex C contains information about complex variables and statistical methods used to analyse data.

• Annex D contains the full list of online result tables.

• Annex E lists the members of the Informal Group on TALIS Starting Strong, a sub-group of the TALIS Governing Board, managers in the national study centres, members of the OECD Secretariat, members of the TALIS Consortium and members of TALIS expert groups that contributed to the TALIS Starting Strong 2024 cycle.

References

[5] Krumpal, I. (2011), “Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: A literature review”, Quality and Quantity, Vol. 47/4, pp. 2025-2047, https://doi.org/10.1007/S11135-011-9640-9.

[1] OECD (2025), TALIS Starting Strong 2024 Conceptual Framework, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f49228be-en.

[3] OECD (2025), TALIS Starting Strong 2024 Questionnaires, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/TALIS-Starting-Strong-Database.html (accessed on 25 October 2025).

[2] OECD (forthcoming), Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2024 Technical Report, OECD Publishing, Paris, forthcoming.

[6] OECD (forthcoming), Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2024 User’s Guide, OECD Publishing, Paris, forthcoming.

[4] van de Vijver, F. and K. Leung (1997), Methods and Data Analysis for Cross-cultural Research, Sage, https://research.tilburguniversity.edu/en/publications/methods-and-data-analysis-for-cross-cultural-research (accessed on 11 June 2025).