Actionable companion · School leadership and instructional improvement

From leadership research to district action: Professional Development among Secondary Teachers in Spain: Key Associated Factors as of PISA 2018

AI-assisted editorial implementation guide. Proposed district actions are separate from the original authors’ findings and recommendations. Independent peer review of this guide is not asserted.

Evidence and transfer

Education-related source: verify which participants, institutions and outcomes were actually studied before district adoption. Source publication type: research-article. License and identity checks do not establish study quality or causality.

Original authors’ abstract, reproduced under the source license:

Professional development for teachers is fundamental in the configuration and functioning of smart schools. This paper aims to characterize professional development with the participation of compulsory secondary teachers in Spain and to detect key factors in the functioning and organization of schools associated with higher levels of ongoing teacher training. A cross-cutting non-experimental design was used to conduct a secondary analysis of data from PISA 2018 tests, including over 20,000 teachers and more than 1000 schools in Spain. Descriptive results show great variability in teachers’ commitment to their professional development; this variability is not associated with the grouping of teachers by school. The decision tree model completed with data mining tools shows that intensive professional teacher development in schools is associated with a better school climate and higher levels of innovation, cooperation, taking on shared goals and responsibilities, and leadership distributed among the education community. The conclusions highlight the importance of ongoing teacher training and how this improves educational quality in schools.

A 90-day district inquiry

1. Days 1–15 · Appraise. Read the source methods, recruitment, comparator, outcomes and limitations. Record how the study setting differs from your district and which claim the design can support.
2. Days 16–30 · Design. Choose one school improvement question with teachers. Protect a short shared planning cycle, agree an instructional change and use a common rubric for examining student work. Agree participation, privacy protections, baseline and stopping rules before starting.
3. Days 31–60 · Observe. Collect the pre-agreed measures, keep a log of implementation changes and invite confidential voluntary feedback. Preserve existing support for staff and learners.
4. Days 61–90 · Decide. Review implementation fidelity, teacher time and independently scored student work against a recorded baseline. Examine access differences and competing explanations before attributing changes to leadership. Make a dated decision to stop, revise or extend the inquiry.

Board decision brief

Present the local problem, source setting, evidence limits, intervention, responsible owner, total cost, measured changes and uncertainty. Separate staff perceptions, implementation measures and student learning outcomes.

Attribution and reuse

Juan Pablo Hernández-Ramos; Fernando Martínez-Abad. Professional Development among Secondary Teachers in Spain: Key Associated Factors as of PISA 2018. Journal of Intelligence (2023-05-14). https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11050093

Prepared 2026-11-07. Source authorship and DOI are preserved. The abstract and source passages are attributed extracts; this editorial guide is offered under the same CC BY 4.0 license.