This chapter examines how teachers can develop their general pedagogical knowledge (GPK) through a variety of system- and school-level resources. It analyses relationships between GPK and teachers’ preparation through their initial teacher education (ITE) and their continuing professional learning opportunities. The importance of induction and collaborative practices for GPK is also analysed.
Results from the Teacher Knowledge Survey
What Teachers Know About General Pedagogy
Abstract
General pedagogical knowledge tends to increase with the highest level of formal education completed by teachers. The benefits of a bachelor's level qualification are clear. However, the advantages of a master's or doctoral degree are not consistently observed.
Teachers whose first teaching qualification included only subject-specific education or training tend to have lower levels of GPK in Chile, Croatia, and Portugal. Training through a fast-track, shorter or specialised teacher education programme is also related to lower GPK in Saudi Arabia, but the reverse is found in Portugal and South Africa.
Teachers tend to have higher GPK when they exchange teaching materials with their colleagues. Teachers are also likely to have higher GPK when they regularly engage in discussions with colleagues about the learning development of specific students. But not all forms of teacher collaboration are linked to increased GPK. In most countries, teachers involved in team teaching are likely to have lower GPK scores.
Teachers with formal teacher education or training in the arts and physical education often have lower GPK scores on average. Teachers with training in the arts have lower GPK scores than those without such training in half of the countries studied. Similarly, teachers with training in physical education have lower GPK scores in half of the countries participating in TKS.
GPK is not associated with the year of completion of formal teacher education and training in most countries. However, in South Africa, teachers with more recent teacher training tend to have higher GPK scores than those who trained in previous years (more than five years prior to TALIS 2024). Conversely, in Portugal, teachers with older qualifications tend to have higher GPK scores.
Teachers’ level of GPK does not tend to vary according to whether their school offers induction programmes, except in Morocco. However, in three participating countries, novice teachers have higher GPK when working in schools where induction activities include planned meetings with the principal and/or experienced teachers. Meanwhile, online activities in induction programmes are associated with a decrease in GPK for novices in Poland and Portugal.
Teachers can acquire knowledge of general pedagogy at all stages of their careers. They start developing relevant general pedagogical knowledge during their initial teacher education (ITE). Continuous professional development is necessary – and often mandated – for teachers to keep their knowledge up to date. Every experience of teaching and interacting with students can help teachers develop their understanding of applied knowledge. Meanwhile, interactions with colleagues and other professionals working in education can also present opportunities for learning. The extent to which teachers can access and benefit from these learning opportunities is shaped by system-level policies, including the organisation of teacher education programmes, requirements for professional development, and the provision of time and resources for collaboration.
Understanding how teachers’ GPK relates to their education, training and various resources can inform policy discussions about how education systems can better support teachers’ acquisition of GPK. This chapter examines teachers’ educational backgrounds and analyses whether particular pathways into teaching are associated with different levels of GPK. It also examines the relationships between GPK and certain resources that could help teachers cultivate GPK once they start teaching, including induction and collaboration with other teacher colleagues.
Level of educational attainment
Education requirements for teachers vary between countries as policymakers balance multiple policy priorities regarding teacher recruitment. For example, raising the criteria for entry into teaching with master’s level programmes can boost the status of teaching by positioning the profession as one that requires highly specialised knowledge (OECD, 2019[1]). However, implementing such policies may increase the risk of teacher shortages, as they act as barriers to the profession.
Lower secondary school teachers have a master’s level degree in most OECD countries (OECD, 2024[2]). In TALIS 2024, 59% of teachers reported holding a master’s or a higher level of qualification across the 27 OECD countries that participated in TALIS (Table 1.7; OECD, (2025[3]). The remaining teachers tend to hold a bachelor’s degree or equivalent. In most countries, few teachers have a short-cycle tertiary degree or a lower qualification. Among countries participating in the Teacher Knowledge Survey (TKS), the share of teachers with this level of qualification is around 1% or less in Chile, Croatia, Poland, Portugal and the United States. This share is also low in Saudi Arabia (2%) but more substantial in Morocco (18%) and South Africa (14%).
Results from the Teacher Knowledge Survey (TKS) show the importance of bachelor’s-level education for teachers’ GPK. Teachers with a bachelor’s-level qualification consistently attained higher GPK scores than teachers with lower-level qualifications, in countries with a sufficient share of teachers without a bachelor’s degree for comparisons to be drawn (Figure 3.1). Differences are smaller in Morocco at 6 score points on average, compared to 13 in South Africa and 14 in Saudi Arabia.
Teachers’ GPK can also increase with higher levels of education. Teachers with master’s degrees or higher qualifications have higher GPK than bachelor’s graduates in Croatia, Portugal and South Africa. But in Chile, Morocco, Poland, Saudi Arabia and the United States, differences are statistically insignificant. These findings echo past research, which has not always indicated a strong relationship between a master’s-level degree and improved teacher quality (Hanushek and Rivkin, 2006[4]; Horn and Jang, 2017[5]).
An important consideration in these analyses is what teachers studied during their degree programmes. One might expect a teacher to have higher GPK if their master’s degree included relevant content such as educational theory, but not if the degree was in a particular discipline, like mathematics. TKS does not ask teachers to specify which field they studied as their highest level of formal education, but country policies can provide some answers. In Croatia and Portugal, where teachers with master’s degrees have higher GPK, initial teacher education typically involves a 3-year undergraduate programme followed by a 2-year master’s in education, or a relevant subject area in Croatia (Table B.1).
Difference in average GPK scores between teachers with bachelor’s degrees and those with other levels of educational attainment
Note: Countries are sorted in descending order of the average difference in GPK scores between teachers with a master’s or doctoral level degree and teachers with a bachelor’s level degree. Statistically non-significant differences are shown in grey. Results are missing for countries where the number of teachers without a bachelor's level degree is too low to make robust comparisons.
Source: OECD, TALIS TKS 2024 Database, Table E.3.1.
Initial teacher education in Poland also awards a master’s degree, but differences in GPK are not statistically significant between bachelor’s graduates and those with higher degrees. Poland has the smallest share of teachers (at only 2%) without a master’s- level degree among TKS countries, since exemptions from master’s-level qualification requirements only exist in very specific circumstances (OECD, 2025[3]; Table 1.7; Table B.5). The fact that very few teachers have only a bachelor’s-level qualification may affect whether statistically significant differences can be detected. However, the lack of significant differences may also be due to the mandatory requirements for all qualified teachers to undergo pedagogical and practical training, regardless of their pathway into the profession (Table B.5). Teachers in Poland who did not take pedagogical studies during their initial degree can only become qualified by completing a non-degree postgraduate teacher education programme, lasting at least 3 semesters (Table B.1).
It is also possible that some master’s-level studies in education provide pre-service teachers with very specific knowledge and skills, which are not reflected in higher GPK scores, as the TKS instrument is designed to assess teachers’ knowledge across a broad range of GPK. This is supported by qualitative evidence from teachers with master’s qualifications, who have indicated that the content of teacher education can be too specific and removed from the realities of teaching to be useful in their day-to-day work (Eklund, Aspfors and Hansén, 2019[6]; Kowalczuk-Walędziak, Clipa and Daniela, 2017[7]).
Type of initial teacher education or training
Different pathways into teaching
Teachers can enter the profession via diverse pathways, which can help make teaching more attractive and accessible to a wider range of candidates. Nevertheless, different pathways have different requirements, which can influence how prepared teachers are upon entering the profession (Gansle, Noell and Burns, 2012[8]; von Hippel and Bellows, 2018[9]). TKS asked teachers to indicate how they acquired their first teaching qualification, considering the following routes:
A regular teacher education or training programme, where teachers complete post-secondary education leading to a teaching credential, typically at a university with a focus on subject-matter, pedagogy and practice either concurrently or consecutively.
A fast-track/shorter or specialised teacher education or training programme, which is generally shorter in duration than regular training programmes and usually designed for specific groups (e.g. second-career candidates, candidates with some teaching experience or candidates with high levels of subject knowledge).
A subject-specific programme, meaning teachers only learned content knowledge and have minimal or no training in pedagogy and practice.
According to TALIS 2024, around 77% of teachers completed regular teacher education or training as their first teaching qualification across the OECD (OECD, 2025[3]; Table 4.1). Among TKS countries, the share of teachers with this type of qualification varies greatly. In Saudi Arabia, only 16% of teachers completed a regular training programme. However, in Poland and Portugal, 94% of teachers report having the same type of training.
In Saudi Arabia, teachers most often have only subject-specific training (49% of teachers), but fast-track teaching qualifications are also more common (22%) than regular teacher education (16%) (OECD, 2025[3]; Table 4.1). Teachers in Morocco also report having only subject-specific degrees (20%) more frequently than fast-track qualifications (15%), although regular teacher education remains the most common educational background. The contrary holds for South Africa, where more teachers have completed a fast-track programme (37%) than a subject-specific degree (9%).
Teaching pathways and GPK
Providing multiple pathways into teaching could help make teaching more attractive and accessible to a wider range of candidates. Whilst GPK is but one aspect of teachers’ professional competence, results from the TKS can indicate whether teachers pursuing different pathways into the profession benefit from similar levels of support and preparation in pedagogy.
Teachers with regular teacher education generally have higher GPK than those with subject-specific qualifications only, although this relationship is only statistically significant in three participating countries (Figure 3.2). In Chile, having only subject-specific ITE is associated with a 19-point decrease in GPK, after accounting for teacher and school characteristics. In Croatia, the associated decrease is 17 points. In Portugal, the difference is greater at 32 points, but fewer than 1% of teachers complete only subject-specific ITE (OECD, 2025[3], Table 4.1).
Change in teachers’ GPK score associated with completing subject-specific education or training only as their first teaching qualification1,2
Note: Countries are sorted in descending order of the size of the coefficient.
Statistically significant coefficients are highlighted with filled circles (see Annex D). Filled circles above 0 indicate a positive association between teachers’ GPK and their completion of subject-specific education or training only, while those below 0 reflect a negative relationship.
1. Binary variable: the reference category refers to “a regular teacher education or training programme”.
2. Results are based on linear regression analysis, showing the change in the outcome variable associated with a one-unit increase in the
explanatory variable after controlling for teacher and school characteristics. Teacher characteristics include gender, age and years of teaching experience; school characteristics include school location, school governance type, school intake of students from socio-economically disadvantaged homes, school intake of students who have
difficulties understanding the language(s) of instruction and school intake of students with special education needs.
Source: OECD, TALIS TKS 2024 Database, Table E.3.2.
It may not be surprising that teachers with only subject-specific qualifications have lower GPK, since their ITE did not, by definition, include pedagogical studies. It is interesting, however, that in several countries, such teachers do not have significantly lower GPK, especially in Morocco and Saudi Arabia, where the subject-specific pathway into teaching is relatively common (OECD, 2025[3]; Table 4.1). This may indicate that the support available to in-service teachers through continuous professional learning is sufficient for them to acquire GPK that is comparable to teachers who completed regular teacher education. At the same time, these findings might also highlight how teachers are being trained through regular teacher education.
Teachers who participated in fast-track or specialised ITE programmes tend not to have different levels of GPK compared to those who completed regular ITE in most TKS countries (Figure 3.3). In fact, teachers who completed such programmes tend to have higher GPK than those undergoing regular teacher education in Portugal and South Africa. Differences are slightly greater in Portugal (10 points) than in South Africa (6 points), but a much smaller proportion of teachers have this type of educational background. Fewer than 2% of teachers in Portugal completed a fast-track programme, and alternative pathways into teaching other than regular teacher education are generally not available (OECD, 2025[3]; Table 4.1; Table B.5).
Change in teachers’ GPK score associated with completing a fast-track/shorter or specialised education or training programme as their first teaching qualification1,2
Note: Countries are sorted in descending order of the size of the coefficient.
Statistically significant coefficients are highlighted with filled circles (see Annex D). Filled circles above 0 indicate a positive association between teachers’ GPK and their completion of a fast-track/shorter or specialised education or training programme, while those below 0 reflect a negative relationship.
1. Binary variable: the reference category refers to “a regular teacher education or training programme”.
2. Results are based on linear regression analysis, showing the change in the outcome variable associated with a one-unit increase in the
explanatory variable. Teacher characteristics include gender, age and years of teaching experience; school characteristics include school
location, school governance type, school intake of students from socio-economically disadvantaged homes, school intake of students who have
difficulties understanding the language(s) of instruction and school intake of students with special education needs.
Source: OECD, TALIS TKS 2024 Database, Table E.3.2.
These data suggest that fast-track teacher education programmes can prepare teachers to the same level of pedagogical knowledge as regular teacher education programmes. Nevertheless, it should be noted that not all fast-track programmes are equal in duration and content. Both factors could influence the level of preparation of their graduates vis-à-vis graduates from regular teacher education programmes.
In South Africa, graduates from any bachelor’s programme may enter teaching by completing pedagogical studies through a fast-track Post-Graduate Certificate in Education (PGCE) over the course of one year, instead of studying the 4-year bachelor’s in education (Table B.1). PGCE programmes in South Africa have faced scepticism due to the reduced amount of time that student teachers have to develop their pedagogical knowledge (Nomlomo and Sosibo, 2016[10]; Verbeek, 2014[11]). TKS results suggest that these programmes provide teachers with sufficient opportunities to learn general pedagogy as regular ITE. Significant differences may also be due to the types of candidates that are attracted to different pathways into teaching. For example, teachers’ GPK scores may be linked to their motivations to teach, which can vary between different routes into teaching (König and Rothland, 2012[12]; Lucksnat et al., 2022[13]).
Conversely, teachers with fast-track qualifications have significantly less knowledge than those with regular ITE in Saudi Arabia, though the difference is modest at 6 points. This finding may not be surprising given that these teachers may be university graduates of subject-specific degrees who passed the teacher licensing examination but did not complete any prior teacher training (Table B.5). Prospective teachers do require some GPK to gain teacher certification as they are tested on their professional and practical knowledge, as well as their values and responsibilities (OECD, 2024[14]). The structure of this fast-track route into teaching is very different from the fast-track PGCE in South Africa, which comprises a year of teacher education, including ten weeks of a teaching practicum (Table B.3, Table B.5).
Year of completion of initial teacher education or training
Even if teachers completed the same broad type of initial teacher education, what their training entailed could have differed widely depending on changes in the approach, content or structure of their training. TKS asks teachers about the year they completed their first teaching qualification to understand how these changes might have influenced teachers’ learning.
Significant differences in GPK between recent graduates and more experienced teachers are found in Portugal and South Africa (Figure 3.4). In Portugal, teachers with qualifications more than 5 years prior to TALIS 2024 tend to have higher GPK than recent graduates. However, the reverse is true in South Africa. Such differences may be linked to changes in requirements for teachers and regulations around ITE that have occurred in recent years in these countries (see Box 3.1 for context). On the other hand, they could reflect differences in how teachers acquire GPK after completing their initial training.
Average GPK score of teachers
Note: Countries are sorted in descending order of the average GPK score of teachers who completed their first teaching qualification less than five years prior to TALIS 2024.
Source: OECD, TALIS TKS 2024 Database, Table E.3.3.
Ensuring that initial teacher education adequately prepares teachers for the classroom is an important policy priority. To improve its quality, policymakers may consider a variety of reforms, including changing minimum requirements for teachers, reforming the organisation of initial teacher education, or introducing different quality assurance mechanisms. This box describes some of the changes made in recent decades in Morocco, Portugal and South Africa.
Morocco
Minimum education requirements to become a teacher were raised in 2012, as the competitive exam to access teacher training programmes was restricted to graduates with a bachelor’s degree. New Centres régionaux des métiers de l’éducation et de la formation (Regional Centres for Education and Training, CRMEF) were established to provide initial teacher training in a one-year programme, replacing the Centres pédagogiques régionaux (Regional Pedagogical Centres, CPR) for teaching at the lower secondary level. An additional exam was introduced for teacher candidates to access the profession following their initial training and internship in 2015.
In 2018, the Ministry of Higher Education, Scientific Research and Innovation introduced the bachelor’s degree programme in education. This initiative seeks to further enhance the quality of teacher recruitment by equipping teachers with five years of pedagogical training. This course included three years at university and two years with the CRMEF, which would provide 60 hours of training during the final year spent completing a full-time teaching internship.
Portugal
Several changes were introduced to initial teacher education with the Legal Framework for Professional Qualification for Teaching outlined in 2007. For one, the minimum qualification for entry into teaching became a master’s degree. The Legal Framework also outlined structures for ITE programmes and time allocations to four core training components: subject knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, learner guidance skills and social and cultural understanding.
A Knowledge and Skills Assessment Test (KSAT) was also made a prerequisite for entry into teaching in 2007. However, this requirement was dropped in 2016 in response to concerns raised about negative effects on teacher autonomy and the reputation of teacher training institutions.
South Africa
The Minimum Requirements for Teacher Education Qualifications (MRTEQ) were revised in 2015 to tackle continued challenges with teacher knowledge in the country. The MRTEQ emphasised the importance of acquiring different types of knowledge through a mix of disciplinary learning (subject-matter knowledge), pedagogical learning (general pedagogical knowledge), practical learning (applied and tacit knowledge), fundamental learning (knowledge of a second official language, ICT and academic literacy) and situational learning (knowledge of diverse contexts).
The MRTEQ outlined the competences required of beginner teachers and designated the Bachelor of Education degree (BEd) and the Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE) as the established routes available to qualified teacher status. The document lays out the minimum number of academic credits required to graduate as well as the general knowledge mix that should be included. For the BEd, at least 192 credits are reserved for and spread between educationally focused disciplinary learning, general pedagogical learning, fundamental learning and situational learning. For the PGCE, at least 32 credits are allocated to the study of the foundations of education, while 40 credits must be given to specialised pedagogical learning and 8 credits to general pedagogical learning.
Source:
Lahchimi (2015[15]), La réforme de la formation des enseignants au Maroc, https://journals.openedition.org/ries/4402.
Bourquia et al. (2021[16]), Le métier de l’enseignant au Maroc. À l’aune de la comparaison internationale, https://www.csefrs.ma/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/30-11-Rapport-me%CC%81tier-de-lenseignant-V-Fr.pdf.
Almeida and Costa (2025[17]), Teacher Training and Professionalization: A Comparative Analysis of Portuguese policies within the European Context, https://doi.org/10.5944/reec.47.2025.44078.
Republic of South Africa (2009[18]), National Qualifications Framework Act, 2008 (Act No. 67 of 2008), https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201409/31909167.pdf.
Subject(s) included in initial teacher education or training
General pedagogical knowledge is relevant for teaching and learning regardless of teachers’ subject area. However, teachers’ professional knowledge also comprises subject-specific content knowledge (CK) and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) on how to teach particular topics or skills within that discipline (OECD, 2025[19]). Past research suggests that GPK and PCK are related, so teachers’ GPK may vary by the PCK levels they have across different subjects, even if they receive similar courses in general pedagogy.
In most cases, the inclusion of a particular subject category in teachers’ formal training is not significantly related to their GPK (Figure 3.5). Where relationships are found, they tend to be negative in non-academic subject categories and positive in academic ones. For example, the arts are negatively associated with GPK in Chile, Poland, Portugal and Saudi Arabia. GPK is negatively associated with formal teacher training in physical education in Poland, Saudi Arabia and the United States. Conversely, teachers with formal teacher training in modern foreign languages are likely to have higher GPK in Croatia, Poland, and Saudi Arabia.
Differences in GPK across subject categories are more common in some countries than others. The subject of teachers’ initial teacher education is not related to their GPK in any category in South Africa. However, in Saudi Arabia, the inclusion of reading, writing and literature; modern foreign languages; technology; the arts and physical education is related to their GPK.
Change in teachers’ GPK score associated with subject categories included in their formal teacher education or training1,2
Note: Statistically significant coefficients are highlighted with filled circles and country labels (see Annex D). Filled circles above 0 indicate a positive association between teachers’ GPK score and the inclusion of a subject category in their formal teacher education or training, while those below 0 reflect a negative relationship.
1. Binary variables: the reference category refers to subjects that are not included in a teacher’s formal teacher education or training.
2. Results based on a single linear regression analysis, showing the change in teachers’ GPK score associated with a one-unit increase in the explanatory variable. The regression controls for teacher characteristics (gender, age and years of teaching experience) and school characteristics (i.e. school location, school governance type, school intake of students from socio-economically disadvantaged homes, school intake of students who have difficulties understanding the language(s) of instruction and school intake of students with special education needs).
Source: OECD, TALIS TKS 2024 Database, Table E.3.4.
School-based support after initial teacher education is essential for teachers to continue to develop their knowledge and skills. For teachers new to the profession, formal and informal induction programmes are common and often mandatory across the OECD (OECD, 2022[20]). Teachers may participate in a variety of activities as part of induction programmes, but evidence for the impact of induction initiatives is currently strongest for mentoring and coaching (OECD, 2019[1]).
Of course, teachers may learn from interactions with their colleagues outside of structured programmes. TALIS 2024 shows that teachers can engage in a range of collaborative activities and that these are significantly associated with teachers’ outcomes, such as perceived fulfilment of their lesson aims, job satisfaction and well-being (OECD, 2025[3]). Data from TKS can help inform whether – and which – collaborative practices are also linked to teachers’ knowledge of general pedagogy.
Induction
Induction programmes can be valuable in helping new teachers learn to utilise the knowledge and skills gained during their ITE, rather than resorting to survival strategies once they enter the classroom (OECD, 2019[1]). Among countries participating in TKS, it is mandatory for schools to offer formal induction programmes for teachers new to the profession in Croatia, Poland, Saudi Arabia and South Africa (Table B.4). However, the duration of these induction programmes varies greatly, ranging from just three to five days in Saudi Arabia to three years and nine months in Poland. At the same time, schools may offer formal induction programmes or informal induction activities that go beyond mandatory requirements.
TALIS 2024 reports that most teachers participated in induction activities, whether formal or informal, across all TKS-participating countries. The share of new teachers (with less than 5 years of teaching experience at their current school) reporting participation in induction ranges from 54% in Morocco to 88% in the United States (OECD, 2025[3]; Table 4.7). These figures likely underestimate the share of teachers who have ever benefited from induction, though, since they only refer to activities offered at teachers’ current schools. This may explain why some teachers do not report participating in such programmes even when induction is mandatory for novice teachers, since they may have participated in a previous school.
TKS includes TALIS 2024 data from school principals on whether teachers have access to induction activities. It is therefore possible to compare the GPK of teachers across schools offering an induction programme (whether formal or informal) and those without. In most cases, differences in GPK are small and statistically insignificant, although in Morocco, teachers in schools with induction programmes tend to have slightly lower GPK (Figure 3.6).
Average GPK score of teachers
Note: Countries are sorted in descending order of the average GPK score of teachers who work in schools that offer formal and/or informal induction programmes, based on reports of principals. Results for Croatia, South Africa and the United States are not reported because the number of teachers in schools offering no induction was too small to reliably estimate their GPK.
Source: OECD, TALIS TKS 2024 Database, Table E.3.5.
TALIS 2024 also asks principals about the provisions included in teacher induction at their schools. Among schools providing formal and/or informal induction activities, support for teachers most often includes working with other staff. Across the OECD, more than 90% of principals in such schools report that induction activities include planned meetings with the principal or experienced teachers, supervision by the principal or experienced teachers, and networking or collaboration with other teachers (OECD, 2024[21]). Provisions affecting timetabling and the number of teachers available to teach different classes are less common. 65% of schools with induction programmes arrange team teaching with experienced teachers, while only 34% offer a reduced teaching load.
Associations between specific induction activities and novice teachers’ GPK are not found in most cases, but they are statistically significant and sizeable in a few instances. In particular, providing planned meetings with principals or experienced teachers is associated with higher average GPK scores in Poland, South Africa and the United States, with estimated coefficients ranging from 42% of a standard deviation in South Africa to 203% of a standard deviation in the United States (Table E.3.6; Figure 3.7).1 The inclusion of a general or administrative introduction in induction was also related to higher levels of GPK in novice teachers in Portugal and Saudi Arabia. Conversely, the inclusion of online activities in induction programmes is related to lower levels of GPK in Poland (an average decrease of 55% of a standard deviation) and Portugal (an average decrease of 33% of a standard deviation).
Change in novice teachers’ GPK score associated with provisions included in induction at their school1,2,3
Note: Statistically significant coefficients are highlighted with filled circles and country labels (see Annex D). Filled circles above 0 indicate a positive association between teachers’ GPK score and the inclusion of a measure in teacher induction at their school, while those below 0 reflect a negative relationship.
1. Binary variables: the reference category refers to measures that are not included in teacher induction at a teacher’s school, based on principals’ reports.
2. Results based on a single linear regression analysis, showing the change in teachers’ GPK score associated with a one-unit increase in the explanatory variable. After controlling for teacher (i.e. gender, age and years of teaching experience) and school characteristics (i.e. school location, school governance type, school intake of students from socio-economically disadvantaged homes, school intake of students who have difficulties understanding the language(s) of instruction and school intake of students with special education needs).
3. Analyses are restricted to teachers with less than 5 years of teaching experience.
Source: OECD, TALIS TKS 2024 Database, Table E.3.6.
Teacher collaboration
Teachers can also broaden their knowledge of teaching and learning by working with their colleagues. Professional collaboration can help individual teachers express their implicit knowledge, making it more accessible to themselves and to the collective of teachers in their school (Guerriero, 2017[22]). Professional exchanges can also encourage teachers to share and co-construct knowledge (Ulferts, 2021[23]).
Teachers in TKS are asked about how often they work with their colleagues in a range of practices. These include deeper forms of professional collaboration, such as team teaching, providing feedback based on classroom observations, engaging in joint activities across different classes and participating in collaborative professional learning. Teachers are also asked about their engagement in simpler forms of exchange and co-ordination for teaching, namely through exchanging teaching materials, discussing the learning development of specific students, and working with other teachers to ensure common standards in evaluations.
TKS results suggest that some forms of professional collaboration are positively associated with teachers’ GPK. For example, relationships between teachers’ GPK and the exchange of teaching materials with colleagues are consistently positive, and statistically significant in Chile, Poland, Portugal, Saudi Arabia and South Africa (Figure 3.8). In addition, engaging in discussions with colleagues about the learning development of specific students is also associated with higher GPK in Croatia, Morocco, Poland, Portugal and South Africa. These positive relationships could reflect the impact of these activities and the types of teachers who voluntarily share materials and discuss student learning with colleagues.
However, other collaborative activities are negatively associated with GPK. Teachers who are involved in team teaching at least once a year tend to have lower GPK in Croatia, Morocco, Poland, Saudi Arabia and South Africa. In addition, teachers are likely to have a lower GPK score if they regularly participate in classroom observations in Croatia, Poland and Portugal. Negative relationships might be observed between GPK and these practices if they are used as measures to help teachers in need of support. Thus, teachers who are less established in their practice might be more likely to be asked to team teach with other colleagues or to observe other teachers’ classes.
Change in teachers’ GPK score associated with their engagement in the following collaborative practices at least 2-4 times a year1,2
Note: Statistically significant coefficients are highlighted with filled circles and country labels (see Annex D). Filled circles above 0 indicate a positive association between teachers’ GPK score and their engagement in a collaborative practice, while those below 0 reflect a negative relationship.
1. Binary variables: the reference category refers to teachers who “never” engage in a practice or do so “once a year or less”.
2. Results based on a single linear regression analysis, showing the change in teachers’ GPK score associated with a one-unit increase in the explanatory variable. The regression controls for teacher characteristics (gender, age and years of teaching experience) and school characteristics (i.e. school location, school governance type, school intake of students from socio-economically disadvantaged homes, school intake of students who have difficulties understanding the language(s) of instruction and school intake of students with special education needs).
Source: OECD, TALIS TKS 2024 Database, Table E.3.7.
References
[17] Almeida, M. and E. Costa (2025), “una Teacher Training and Professionalization: A Comparative Analysis of Portuguese policies within the European Context, Formación y Profesionalización Docente: Un Análisis Comparativo de las Políticas Portuguesas en el Contexto Europeo”, Revista Española de Educación Comparada 47, pp. 89-111, https://doi.org/10.5944/reec.47.2025.44078.
[16] Bourqia, R. et al. (2021), Le métier de l’enseignant au Maroc. À l’aune de la comparaison internationale, Conseil Supérieur de l’Education, de la Formation et de la Recherche Scientifique (CSEFRS), https://www.csefrs.ma/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/30-11-Rapport-me%CC%81tier-de-lenseignant-V-Fr.pdf.
[6] Eklund, G., J. Aspfors and S. Hansén (2019), “Master’s thesis–a tool for professional development? Teachers’ experiences from Finnish teacher education”, Nordisk tidsskrift for utdanning og praksis, Vol. 13/2, pp. 76-92, https://utdanningogpraksis.no/index.php/up/article/view/1973/3760.
[8] Gansle, K., G. Noell and J. Burns (2012), “Do Student Achievement Outcomes Differ Across Teacher Preparation Programs? An Analysis of Teacher Education in Louisiana”, Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 63/5, pp. 304-317, https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487112439894.
[22] Guerriero, S. (ed.) (2017), Pedagogical Knowledge and the Changing Nature of the Teaching Profession, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264270695-en.
[4] Hanushek, E. and S. Rivkin (2006), “Chapter 18 Teacher Quality”, in Handbook of the Economics of Education, Elsevier, https://doi.org/10.1016/s1574-0692(06)02018-6.
[5] Horn, A. and S. Jang (2017), “The Impact of Graduate Education on Teacher Effectiveness: Does a Master’s Degree Matter?”, Midwestern Higher Education Compact, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED587432.pdf.
[12] König, J. and M. Rothland (2012), “Motivations for choosing teaching as a career: effects on general pedagogical knowledge during initial teacher education”, Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 40/3, pp. 289-315, https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2012.700045.
[7] Kowalczuk-Walędziak, M., O. Clipa and L. Daniela (2017), “Do teachers really need a master’s degree? Student teachers’ perspectives”, Journal of Education Sciences, Vol. 18/35, pp. 38-58, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1260380.pdf.
[15] Lahchimi, M. (2015), “La réforme de la formation des enseignants au Maroc”, Revue internationale d’éducation de Sèvres 69, pp. 21-26, https://doi.org/10.4000/ries.4402.
[13] Lucksnat, C. et al. (2022), “How do traditionally and alternatively certified teachers differ? A comparison of their motives for teaching, their well-being, and their intention to stay in the profession”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 117, p. 103784, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103784.
[10] Nomlomo, V. and Z. Sosibo (2016), “From theory to practice: Beginner teachers’ experiences of the rigour of the Postgraduate Certificate in Education programme”, Perspectives in Education, Vol. 34/1, https://doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/pie.v34i1.14.
[3] OECD (2025), Results from TALIS 2024: The State of Teaching, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/90df6235-en.
[19] OECD (2025), TALIS Teacher Knowledge Survey 2024 Conceptual and Assessment Framework, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/65903902-en.
[14] OECD (2024), “A profile of an evaluation and assessment agency: Saudi Arabia’s Education and Training Evaluation Commission (ETEC)”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, No. 93, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/318266a4-en.
[2] OECD (2024), Education at a Glance 2024: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en.
[21] OECD (2024), TALIS 2024 Database, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/talis-2024-database.html#data (accessed on 23 February 2026).
[20] OECD (2022), Education at a Glance 2022: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3197152b-en.
[1] OECD (2019), A Flying Start: Improving Initial Teacher Preparation Systems, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/cf74e549-en.
[18] Republic of South Africa (2009), National Qualifications Framework Act, 2008 (Act No. 67 of 2008), Government Gazette, Vol. 524, No. 31909, https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201409/31909167.pdf (accessed on 11 March 2026).
[23] Ulferts, H. (ed.) (2021), Teaching as a Knowledge Profession: Studying Pedagogical Knowledge across Education Systems, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e823ef6e-en.
[11] Verbeek, C. (2014), “Critical reflections on the PGCE (Foundation Phase) qualification in South Africa”, South African Journal of Childhood Education, Vol. 4/3, pp. 37-51, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1187290.pdf.
[9] von Hippel, P. and L. Bellows (2018), “How much does teacher quality vary across teacher preparation programs? Reanalyses from six states”, Economics of Education Review, Vol. 64, pp. 298-312, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.01.005.
1 Based on comparisons of regression coefficients with the standard deviation of GPK (50 score points) across the eight participating countries.