Although women make up the majority of the teaching profession in upper secondary education, the share of female teachers is significantly higher in general programmes than in vocational ones.
There are relatively few young teachers (under the age of 30), and the proportion decreases with the level of education. Young teachers make up 12% of the teaching population in primary education, 10% in lower secondary education and 8% in upper secondary education, on average across OECD countries.
At upper secondary level, the share of teachers below the age of 30 fell by 4 percentage points between 2005 and 2018, on average across OECD countries with available data.
Education at a Glance 2020
OECD Indicators
Education at a Glance
Indicator D5. Who are the teachers?
Highlights
Figure D5.1. Gender distribution of teachers in upper secondary education, by programme orientation (2018)
Percentage of women among teaching staff in public and private institutions
1. Upper secondary includes programmes outside upper secondary level.
2. Public institutions only.
Countries are ranked in descending order of the share of women in general programmes.
Source: OECD/UIS/Eurostat (2020), Table D5.1. See Source section for more information and Annex 3 for notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/69096873-en).
Context
The demand for teachers depends on a range of factors, including average class sizes, required instruction time for students, the use of teaching assistants and other non-classroom staff in schools, enrolment rates at different levels of education, and the starting and ending age of compulsory education. With large proportions of teachers in many OECD countries set to reach retirement age in the next decade and the size of the school-age population projected to increase in some countries, governments will be under pressure to recruit and train new teachers. There is compelling evidence that the calibre of teachers is the most significant in-school determinant of student achievement, so concerted efforts are needed to attract top talent to the teaching profession and provide them with high-quality training (OECD, 2019[1]).
Teacher retention policies need to promote work environments that encourage effective teachers to continue teaching. In addition, teaching at the pre-primary, primary and lower secondary levels remains largely dominated by women so the gender imbalance in the teaching profession, and its possible effect on students’ learning, warrant detailed study (OECD, 2017[2]).
Other findings
Women make up the majority of teachers in primary and secondary education, while they are under-represented in tertiary education. At all education levels, the largest share of women is found among the new generation of teachers (below the age of 30).
Between 2005 and 2018, on average across OECD countries, there was a gradual increase in the gender gap in favour of women from primary level to upper secondary level, but a decrease in the gap in favour of men at the tertiary level.
The share of older teachers (aged 50 and over) increases with the education level, from 32% in primary education to 36% in lower secondary and 39% in upper secondary education.
On average across OECD countries participating in the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS), around 90% of teachers say they were motivated to join the profession by the opportunity to influence children’s development and contribute to society. On average, 76% of teachers report that, if they could decide again, they would still choose to work as a teacher.
Analysis
Gender profile of teachers
Share of female teachers, by level of education
On average across OECD countries, 70% of teachers are women in all levels of education combined. The greatest concentration of female teachers occurs in the earlier years of schooling, and the share shrinks with each successive level of education. While women represent 96% of the teaching staff at pre‑primary level and 82% at primary level, they make up 60% at upper secondary and only 44% at tertiary level on average across OECD countries (Table D5.1).
Women account for over 85% of pre-primary teachers in all OECD and partner countries with available data, and over 65% of primary teachers in all countries except Japan (64%), Turkey (62%) and Saudi Arabia (52%). In secondary education, although female teachers continue to dominate, the proportion of female teachers is smaller than at lower levels. Women make up 67% of lower secondary teachers on average across OECD countries, with values ranging from 43% in Japan to 85% in Latvia. At upper secondary level the share of female teachers’ drops to 60% on average across OECD countries, with significant variations across countries (from 31% in Japan to 80% in Latvia) (Table D5.1).
At the tertiary level, the gender profile of teachers is reversed, with men making up the majority across OECD countries and female teachers accounting for 44% of the teaching staff on average. In fact, among countries with available data, only in Finland, Latvia, Lithuania and the Russian Federation do women make up more than 50% of teachers in tertiary education. The smallest share of female tertiary teachers among OECD countries is found in Japan (28%) (Table D5.1).
Share of female upper secondary teachers, by programme orientation
The share of women among upper secondary teachers tends to be higher in general than in vocational programmes, although women are over-represented in both types of programmes. In general education, women account for 62% of teachers on average across OECD countries, and there are more female than male teachers in all countries except Switzerland (48%). The share of female teachers is particularly high in countries such as Latvia and Lithuania, where over 80% are women. In contrast, in vocational programmes, women account for a smaller share of teachers: 56% on average across OECD countries. The share of female teachers in vocational education ranges from 44% in Switzerland to 73% in Latvia (Figure D5.1).
In some countries, the share of female teachers differs significantly between general and vocational programmes. For instance, in Austria, Brazil, Finland, Hungary, Latvia and Lithuania, the share of female teachers in general programmes is at least 10 percentage points higher than in vocational programmes, even though women still make up the majority of vocational teachers in these countries. In contrast, the share of female teachers is the same in general and vocational programmes in the Czech Republic (at 60%), the Netherlands (54%), Norway (55%) and Slovenia (67%) (Figure D5.1).
Box D5.1. Potential sources and implications of gender imbalances in the teaching profession
Several factors may contribute to gender imbalances in the teaching profession across levels of education and programme types. One explanation may be cultural: social perceptions of the links between gender and choice of profession may influence both men and women’s career choices. This gender bias often arises very early, at home, when parents might base their aspirations for their children’s professions on gender stereotypes (Croft et al., 2014[3]; Kane and Mertz, 2012[4]; OECD, 2015[5]). Even within the teaching profession, there are gender imbalances in the different fields of study. At the lower secondary level, women make up a smaller share of teachers in science, mathematics and technology than in the overall teaching population (OECD, 2014[6]; OECD, 2017[2]). This may result from the social perception of science and technology as being a masculine domain, which may discourage women from pursuing tertiary studies in that field (see Indicator B4 and (OECD, 2014[6])).
From an economic point of view, the choice of future jobs is also influenced by young people’s expectations for future earning potential. On average across OECD countries, male teachers earn less than their male tertiary-educated counterparts in other professions, while female teachers in primary and lower secondary education earn virtually the same as women with tertiary degrees in other fields (see Indicator D3 and (OECD, 2017[2])). These differences in relative salaries are likely to make the teaching profession more appealing to women than to men, compared to other professions.
The potential impact of this gender imbalance in the teaching profession on student achievement, student motivation and teacher retention is worthy of study, especially in countries where few men are attracted to the profession (Drudy, 2008[7]; OECD, 2005[8]; OECD, 2009[9]). While there is little evidence that a teacher’s gender has an effect on student performance (Antecol, Eren and Ozbeklik, 2012[10]; Holmlund and Sund, 2008[11]), aiming for a better balance between genders could nevertheless have positive effects on all students. In particular, male and female teachers can contribute to students developing positive gender identities and challenge stereotyped views (Hutchings et al., 2008[12]). There is also some evidence that female teachers’ attitudes towards some school subjects, such as mathematics, can influence their female students’ achievement (Beilock et al., 2010[13]; OECD, 2014[14]).
Share of female teachers, by age group and level of education
The higher proportion of women among young teachers, together with the predominance of female tertiary graduates in the field of education (see Education at a Glance Database), may raise concerns about future gender imbalances at the primary to upper secondary levels, where women already dominate the profession.
In most countries, the share of women is higher among young teachers (under the age of 30) than among older teachers (aged 50 or older). At primary level, the difference between the two age groups is rather small, with women making up 83% of the younger group, compared to 82% of the older group, on average across OECD countries. At lower secondary level, the difference is also small on average: women make up 68% of teachers under the age of 30, and 66% of those of aged 50 or older. The difference grows larger at upper secondary level: on average across OECD countries, 63% of young teachers are women at this level, compared to 56% in the older group (Table D5.2).
However, at tertiary level, where female teachers are in the minority on average, the higher share of women among the younger generation of teachers suggests there will be an increase in gender parity. On average across OECD countries, the share of women is closer to 50% among younger tertiary teachers, accounting for 52% of teachers under the age of 30, compared to 39% among those aged 50 or older (Table D5.2).
These indicators are consistent with the gender distribution dynamics observed over the decade, which point to a gradual increase in the gender gap in the teaching profession at the primary and secondary level, but a decrease at the tertiary level. On average, for all OECD countries with data for both years, the rise in the share of female teachers between 2005 and 2018 has widened the gender gap by 3 percentage points for the primary and secondary levels combined, while it has narrowed the gap by 5 percentage points at the tertiary level. At the primary and secondary levels, the increase exceeds 5 percentage points in countries such as the Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Korea and Slovenia. At the tertiary level, the gender gap has decreased considerably in many countries, with a change of at least 7 percentage points in Belgium, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands and Slovenia (Table D5.2).
The persistent gender imbalances in the teaching profession, together with imbalances in school leadership, have raised a number of concerns, and countries such as the United Kingdom have implemented policies encouraging the recruitment and retention of a diverse and inclusive teacher workforce, including in terms of gender (OECD, 2014[6]; OECD, 2017[2]).
Teachers’ age distribution
Teachers’ age distribution varies considerably across countries and levels of education, and can be affected by a variety of factors, such as the size and age distribution of the population, the duration of tertiary education, and teachers’ salaries and working conditions. Declining birth rates, for example, may drive down the demand for new teachers, and more time spent in tertiary education can delay the entrance of teachers into the labour market. Competitive salaries, good working conditions and career development opportunities may have attracted young people to teaching in some countries or helped to retain effective teachers in others.
Young teachers (below the age of 30) only account for a small proportion of the teaching population: 12% in primary education, 10% in lower secondary and 8% in upper secondary, on average across OECD countries. The pattern is particularly striking at the upper secondary level, where young teachers make up less than 10% of the teaching population in most countries. In fact, they account for less than 5% of upper secondary teachers in the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain (Figure D5.2).
On average across OECD countries, more than half of primary, lower secondary and upper secondary teachers are aged between 30 and 49, and a high share of teachers are at least 50 years old. The share of older teachers (aged 50 and over) increases with the education level, from 32% in primary education to 36% in lower secondary and 39% in upper secondary education. In most countries, at least one teacher in every three at upper secondary level is aged 50 or over. There is, however, a high level of variation across countries, with the share at upper secondary level ranging from 15% in Turkey to 63% in Italy (Table D5.3).
The ageing of the teaching force has a number of implications for countries’ education systems. In addition to prompting recruitment and training efforts to replace retiring teachers, it may also affect budgetary decisions. In most school systems, teachers’ salaries increase with years of teaching experience. Thus, the ageing of teachers increases school costs, which can in turn limit the resources available for other initiatives (see Box D2.3 in Indicator D2). In addition, during the current COVID-19 crisis, the high share of teachers over the age of 50 may raise health concerns, as older individuals are more at risk of developing severe forms of the disease (Jordan, Adab and Cheng, 2020[15]).
Figure D5.2. Share of teachers below the age of 30, by level of education (2018)
1. Upper secondary includes programmes outside upper secondary level.
2. Public institutions only.
3. Public institutions only for upper secondary level.
4. Primary includes pre-primary education.
5. Primary includes lower secondary education.
Countries are ranked in descending order of the share of teachers below the age of 30 in primary education.
Source: OECD/UIS/Eurostat (2020), Table D5.3. See Source section for more information and Annex 3 for notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/69096873-en).
Trends in the share of young upper secondary teachers between 2005 and 2018
As discussed above, upper secondary education is the level with the smallest share of young teachers on average across OECD countries, and this share has been decreasing in recent years. While on average 12% of upper secondary teachers were below the age of 30 in 2005, this proportion had fallen by 4 percentage points in 2018. The largest decreases were observed in Luxembourg (8 percentage points) and Poland (10 percentage points). In Luxembourg, the share of young teachers still remains above the OECD average at 10%, although in Poland it is now below average, at 4% (Figure D5.3).
However, a few countries have experienced an increase in the share of young upper secondary teachers between 2005 and 2018. The largest increases were observed in Chile (6 percentage points), Japan (4 percentage points) and the United Kingdom (4 percentage points) (Figure D5.3). This may partly reflect efforts to implement teacher recruitment policies. For instance, the United Kingdom launched an ambitious recruitment campaign in the early 2000s, aiming at improving the status of the teaching profession. The campaign used slogans such as “Use your head: teach” or “Turn your talent to teaching”, in order to appeal to young people who were considering teaching but were put off by a number of barriers, including the financial burden of the training. The United Kingdom combined this with financial support for teacher trainees (OECD, 2011[16]). Similarly, Chile implemented the National Teachers Policy in 2017, which sets a new salary scale and professional development system for teachers in publicly funded schools. It also introduced the “Teacher Vocation” scholarship, which covers tuition fees for students in universities (Santiago et al., 2017[17]).
Figure D5.3. Share of upper secondary teachers below the age of 30 (2005 and 2018)
1. Upper secondary includes programmes outside upper secondary level.
2. Public institutions only.
3. Upper secondary includes lower secondary programmes.
Countries are ranked in descending order of the share of teachers below the age of 30 in 2018.
Source: OECD/UIS/Eurostat (2020), Table D5.3 and Education at a Glance Database, http://stats.oecd.org. See Source section for more information and Annex 3 for notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/69096873-en).
Box D5.2. Attracting and retaining teachers: Insights from TALIS 2018
The Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) covers about 260 000 teachers across 48 countries and economies, and provides data on topics such as teachers’ and school leaders’ working environment, their motivations and their job satisfaction. This box focuses on teachers’ motivations to enter the profession and on their job satisfaction, as both factors can influence the attractiveness of the profession and teacher retention.
Looking at individuals’ motivations to become teachers helps understand what aspects of the job make it attractive. A large share of lower secondary teachers affirm that one of their main motivations in becoming a teacher was serving a larger social purpose. In fact, around 90% of teachers across OECD countries mention a sense of self-fulfilment through the opportunity to influence children’s development and contribute to society. Factors related to the teaching schedule, job security and reliability of income are reported as important motivations by around 60-70% of teachers (OECD, 2019[1]).1
The Teaching and Learning international Survey (TALIS) also offers insights into teachers’ job satisfaction, which can be key to ensuring teacher retention. On average across OECD countries, although only 39% of lower secondary teachers report being satisfied with their salaries, the great majority of them (90%) declare that they are, all in all, satisfied with their job, and that they enjoy working at their current school. In addition, 76% of teachers on average report that, if they could decide again, they would still choose to work as a teacher. This proportion varies significantly across countries, however. While less than 65% of teachers would still decide to teach in Iceland, Japan, Lithuania, South Africa and Sweden, this share rises to over 90% in Argentina (Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires), Colombia and Mexico (Figure D5.4 and (OECD, 2020[18])).
Several factors may help predict teachers’ job satisfaction. These include selecting motivated candidates who are eager to become lifelong learners, putting an emphasis on induction and mentoring throughout teachers’ careers, and providing opportunities for meaningful and impactful professional learning. Working conditions and school climate (e.g. a collaborative environment), as well as factors related to trust and respect for teachers’ work, can also be key to ensuring teachers’ satisfaction and the attractiveness of the profession (Schleicher, 2018[19]).
Figure D5.4. Lower secondary teachers' job satisfaction (2018)
Percentage of lower secondary teachers who would still choose to work as a teacher, if they could decide again
Note: Includes teachers who “agree” or “strongly agree” with the statement: “If I could decide again, I would still decide to work as a teacher”.
Countries and economies are ranked in descending order of the percentage of teachers who would still decide to work as a teacher, if they could decide again.
Source: OECD, TALIS 2018 Database, Table II.2.10. For more information (including standard errors), see https://www.oecd.org/education/talis/talis2018tables.htm.
1. The measures presented in this paragraph correspond to the percentage of lower secondary teachers who report that these elements were of “moderate” or “high” importance in deciding to become a teacher, on average across the 31 OECD countries participating in TALIS.
Definitions
There are two categories of instructional personnel:
Teachers’ aides and teaching/research assistants include non-professional personnel or students who support teachers in providing instruction to students.
Teaching staff refers to professional personnel directly involved in teaching to students. The classification includes classroom teachers, special-education teachers and other teachers who work with a whole class of students in a classroom, in small groups in a resource room, or in one-to-one teaching situations inside or outside a regular class. At the tertiary level, academic staff include personnel whose primary assignment is instruction or research. Teaching staff also include departmental chairs whose duties include some teaching, but exclude non-professional personnel who support teachers in providing instruction to students, such as teachers’ aides and other paraprofessional personnel.
Methodology
The share of teachers in the population corresponds to the proportion of teachers in a given age group (e.g. below the age of 30) among the total population of the same age group.
For more information, please see the OECD Handbook for Internationally Comparative Education Statistics 2018 (OECD, 2018[20]) and Annex 3 for country-specific notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/69096873-en).
Source
Data refer to the academic year 2017/18 and are based on the UNESCO-UIS/OECD/EUROSTAT data collection on education statistics administered by the OECD in 2019 (for details, see Annex 3 at https://doi.org/10.1787/69096873-en).
References
[10] Antecol, H., O. Eren and S. Ozbeklik (2012), “The effect of teacher gender on student achievement in primary school: Evidence from a randomized experiment”, IZA Discussion Paper Series, No. 6453, Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit, Bonn, http://ftp.iza.org/dp6453.pdf (accessed on 20 April 2018).
[13] Beilock, S. et al. (2010), “Female teachers’ math anxiety affects girls’ math achievement”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Vol. 107/5, pp. 1860-1863, http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0910967107.
[3] Croft, A. et al. (2014), “The second shift reflected in the second generation: Do parents’ gender roles at home predict children’s aspirations?”, Psychological Science, Vol. 25/7, pp. 1418-1428, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797614533968.
[7] Drudy, S. (2008), “Gender balance/gender bias: The teaching profession and the impact of feminisation”, Gender and Education, Vol. 20/4, pp. 309-323, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09540250802190156.
[11] Holmlund, H. and K. Sund (2008), “Is the gender gap in school performance affected by the sex of the teacher?”, Labour Economics, Vol. 15/1, pp. 37-53, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2006.12.002.
[12] Hutchings, M. et al. (2008), “Nice and kind, smart and funny: What children like and want to emulate in their teachers”, Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 34/2, pp. 135-157, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03054980701663959.
[15] Jordan, R., P. Adab and K. Cheng (2020), “Covid-19: Risk factors for severe disease and death”, BMJ, p. m1198, http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1198.
[4] Kane, J. and J. Mertz (2012), “Debunking myths about gender and mathematics performance”, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, Vol. 59/1, http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/noti790.
[18] OECD (2020), TALIS 2018 Results (Volume II): Teachers and School Leaders as Valued Professionals, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/19cf08df-en.
[1] OECD (2019), TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en.
[20] OECD (2018), OECD Handbook for Internationally Comparative Education Statistics 2018: Concepts, Standards, Definitions and Classifications, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264304444-en.
[2] OECD (2017), “Gender imbalances in the teaching profession”, Education Indicators in Focus, No. 49, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/54f0ef95-en.
[5] OECD (2015), “What lies behind gender inequality in education?”, PISA in Focus, No. 49, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5js4xffhhc30-en.
[6] OECD (2014), PISA 2012 Results: What Students Know and Can Do (Volume I, Revised edition, February 2014): Student Performance in Mathematics, Reading and Science, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264208780-en.
[14] OECD (2014), TALIS 2013 Results: An International Perspective on Teaching and Learning, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264196261-en.
[16] OECD (2011), Lessons from PISA for the United States, Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264096660-en.
[9] OECD (2009), Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments: First Results from TALIS, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264068780-en.
[8] OECD (2005), Teachers Matter: Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers, Education and Training Policy, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264018044-en.
[17] Santiago, P. et al. (2017), OECD Reviews of School Resources: Chile 2017, OECD Reviews of School Resources, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264285637-en.
[19] Schleicher, A. (2018), TALIS 2018: Insights and Interpretations, OECD, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/education/talis/TALIS2018_insights_and_interpretations.pdf (accessed on 29 May 2020).
Indicator D5 Tables
Table D5.1 Gender distribution of teachers (2018)
Table D5.2 Gender distribution of teachers by age group (2018) and percentage of female teachers for all ages (2005 and 2018)
Table D5.3 Age distribution of teachers (2018)
Cut-off date for the data: 19 July 2020. Any updates on data can be found on line at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/eag-data-en. More breakdowns can also be found at http://stats.oecd.org/, Education at a Glance Database.
StatLink: https://doi.org/10.1787/888934165909
Table D5.1. Gender distribution of teachers (2018)
Percentage of female teachers in public and private institutions by level of education, based on head counts
Note: The data for "All levels of education" do not include early childhood educational development (ISCED 01).
1. For Canada, public institutions only at tertiary level. For Ireland, public institutions only for all levels except pre-primary. For Israel, private institutions are only included at primary and bachelor's, master's and doctoral levels.
2. Pre-primary includes early childhood education.
Source: OECD/UIS/Eurostat (2020). See Source section for more information and Annex 3 for notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/69096873-en).
Please refer to the Reader's Guide for information concerning symbols for missing data and abbreviations.
Table D5.2. Gender distribution of teachers by age group (2018) and percentage of female teachers for all ages (2005 and 2018)
Percentage of female teachers, by age group and level of education
1. Primary includes pre-primary education.
2. For Canada, public institutions only at tertiary level. For Ireland, public institutions only. For Ireland, public institutions only. For Israel, private institutions are only included at primary and bachelor's, master's and doctoral levels.
3. Upper secondary includes programmes outside upper secondary level. For Japan, tertiary includes programmes outside tertiary level - see Annex 3 for further details.
4. Tertiary includes programmes outside tertiary level - see Annex 3 for further details.
5. Upper secondary is included partly in lower secondary education and partly in tertiary education. Total primary to upper secondary excludes part of upper secondary education.
Source: OECD/UIS/Eurostat (2020). See Source section for more information and Annex 3 for notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/69096873-en).
Please refer to the Reader's Guide for information concerning symbols for missing data and abbreviations.
Table D5.3. Age distribution of teachers (2018)
Percentage of teachers in public and private institutions, by level of education and age group, based on head counts
1. Primary includes pre-primary education.
2. For Canada, public institutions only at tertiary level. For Ireland, public institutions only. For Israel, private institutions are included for all levels except for pre-primary and upper secondary levels.
3. Upper secondary includes programmes outside upper secondary level - see Annex 3 for further details.
Source: OECD/UIS/Eurostat (2020). See Source section for more information and Annex 3 for notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/69096873-en).
Please refer to the Reader's Guide for information concerning symbols for missing data and abbreviations.