Your questions 

Teachers’ motivation to take part in professional development (PD) is shaped by a mix of personal, professional, and contextual factors. The evidence highlights three broad influences: intrinsic drivers, extrinsic incentives, and the school environment. 

Intrinsic factors include a desire for growth, autonomy, and professional mastery. Teachers often engage in PD to deepen their knowledge, improve their practice, and pursue subject areas they feel passionate about. Studies suggest that when PD connects with these intrinsic interests, teachers are more likely to sustain their involvement. 

Extrinsic motivations also matter. Some teachers see PD as a route to career progression or leadership roles, while others participate because of policy requirements or school mandates. Opportunities for collaboration and peer exchange can also act as strong motivators, providing both social interaction and professional stimulation. 

Finally, environmental and structural conditions influence engagement. Teachers are more likely to join PD when it aligns with curriculum reforms, responds to new standards, or is embedded in a school culture that values professional growth. Conversely, when in-school PD is limited or not relevant, teachers sometimes seek external opportunities that better meet their needs. 

For school leaders, the evidence suggests that PD is most engaging when it taps into teachers’ intrinsic motivations, offers clear professional benefits, and is supported by a culture that values continuous learning. 

Where were the studies conducted? 

Much of the evidence comes from the United States, particularly in relation to science and chemistry teachers involved in STEM reforms. The research focuses mainly on secondary education, with some insights drawn from studies of exemplary teachers across diverse school contexts. 

Questions for reflection 

• How well does your current PD offer align with teachers’ intrinsic motivations, such as their passion for subject knowledge or desire for professional mastery? 

• In what ways could you make explicit the professional benefits of engaging in PD, whether through career development, collaboration, or recognition? 

• How might you adapt your school’s PD culture and structures to reduce barriers and create conditions where teachers feel encouraged and supported to participate? 

Sources:

Factors Affecting Teachers’ Engagement in Continuing Professional Development

Motivational Factors Influencing Teachers’ Participation in Professional Development Programs

Profiling Teachers’ Motivation for Professional Development: A Nationwide Study

Exploring science teachers’ self-selection attitudes into professional development programs: motivations, preferences, and implications for practice

There is very little direct evidence on how professional development (PD) reduces workload. The only study to examine this explicitly comes from England (DfE, 2018). Most research instead focuses on how PD can support teaching and learning, but some design features appear to make participation easier and may therefore help limit workload. 

Approaches such as online or blended formats, tiered delivery models that adapt to teachers’ needs, and embedding PD into existing school routines are highlighted in several studies. While these strategies are primarily about improving access and effectiveness, they may also reduce the extra time and effort PD can create. 

Some research also suggests that involving teachers in curriculum co-design makes PD feel more relevant and better aligned with daily practice. Teachers report this reduces the sense of additional workload, though the evidence remains limited and mostly based on perceptions. 

For school leaders, the key message is that while the evidence base is thin, PD that is flexible, integrated into existing routines, and shaped with teacher input is more likely to feel manageable alongside other responsibilities. 

Where were the studies conducted?
The one study directly examining workload (DfE, 2018) is from England. Other studies that offer indirect insights come mainly from the UK and US, with one study from Australia. The focus across these studies is on both primary and secondary settings, covering subject-specific PD and cross-curricular pedagogy. 

Questions for reflection 

• How is professional development currently scheduled and delivered in your setting, and where might small design changes (such as embedding into routines or using blended formats) reduce the sense of extra workload for staff? 

• In what ways could involving teachers in shaping the content or design of PD make it feel more relevant and manageable alongside their other responsibilities? 

• Given the lack of strong evidence in this area, how might you balance the need to provide effective PD with your responsibility to protect staff wellbeing and workload? 

Sources:
Successful design and delivery of online professional development for teachers: A systematic review of the literature.

Multi-tiered systems of educator professional development: A systematic literature review of responsive, tiered professional development models.

Empowering educators through integrated professional development: A study on the impact of pedagogical innovations and curriculum co-design in in-service teacher training programs.

Mapping professional development for reducing teacher workload

Co-design for curriculum planning: A model for professional development for high school teachers.

Research suggests that professional learning (PL) is often most effective when it is closely connected to what teachers teach. Subject-specific PL, particularly when it strengthens teachers’ understanding of both subject knowledge and how to teach it, shows the most consistent improvements in classroom practice. When teachers can apply new learning directly to the curriculum they are about to deliver, the impact is clearer and easier to sustain. 

However, the evidence also highlights three important considerations: 

1. Subject alignment strengthens impact. PL that builds subject knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge tends to show more consistent improvements in teaching practice. 

1. Phase and setting shape implementation. Differences between early years, primary and secondary settings, or between schools, influence how PL is enacted. Leadership support, time for collaboration, and alignment with school priorities affect whether PL leads to sustained change. 

1. Design quality matters across contexts. Well-designed generic PL, particularly when collaborative, sustained over time, and focused on improving practice, can improve teaching quality across different subjects and phases. 

Direct comparisons between subject-focused and generic PL are challenging because they often aim to improve different aspects of teaching and may influence different outcomes.  

For school leaders, the key message is that subject specificity increases the likelihood of relevance and impact, but effectiveness ultimately depends on design quality and implementation conditions within the school. 

Where were the studies conducted? 

Most of the studies were conducted in the United States, with some evidence from the United Kingdom. The research spans early years to secondary education but is weighted toward primary and secondary settings. Mathematics and literacy are strongly represented, science is moderately represented, and other subjects are less frequently studied. 

References 

Cordingley, Philippa, Greany, Toby, Crisp, Bart, Seleznyov, Sarah, Bradbury, Megan and Perry, Thomas (2018) Developing great subject teaching : rapid evidence review of subject-specific continuing professional development in the UK. Wellcome Trust.  

Desimone, L.M. and Garet, M.S., 2015. Best practices in teacher’s professional development in the United States. 

Gore, J., Lloyd, A., Smith, M., Bowe, J., Ellis, H. and Lubans, D., 2017. Effects of professional development on the quality of teaching: Results from a randomised controlled trial of Quality Teaching Rounds. Teaching and teacher education, 68, pp.99-113. 

Kennedy, M.M., 2016. How does professional development improve teaching?. Review of educational research, 86(4), pp.945-980.  

Kraft, M.A., Blazar, D. and Hogan, D., 2018. The effect of teacher coaching on instruction and achievement: A meta-analysis of the causal evidence. Review of educational research, 88(4), pp.547-588.  

Sims, S. and Fletcher-Wood, H., 2021. Identifying the characteristics of effective teacher professional development: A critical review. School effectiveness and school improvement, 32(1), pp.47-63.