Out-of-Field Teaching in Craft Education as a Part of Early STEM: The Situation at German Elementary Schools

Abstract

The shortage of skilled professionals in technical fields is further compounded by a lack of qualified teachers in STEM subjects, particularly in craft education, which is vital for developing technical competencies at the elementary level. The present study investigates the professionalisation of teachers in craft education and explores the prevalence and reasons for out-of-field teaching across three German federal states. The data presented herein were collected through an online survey administered in 2023 among teaching professionals in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Sachsen, and Thüringen. The questionnaire was disseminated via head teachers to 1467 elementary schools, yielding a self-selection sample of 284 craft education teachers. The survey incorporated both closed- and open-ended questions, encompassing inquiries into teacher qualifications, subject-specific competence, and lesson planning. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively. The evaluation of open-ended responses employed a content-structuring content analysis approach, utilising categories that were inductively developed. The findings indicate that a considerable proportion of craft education is taught by educators who lack formal qualifications, thereby giving rise to concerns regarding the quality of instruction. The underlying factors contributing to this phenomenon include teacher shortages, personal interests, prior experience, and limited professional development opportunities. The findings emphasise the pressing necessity for enhanced teacher education and targeted training programmes to bolster instructional quality in technically oriented subjects.

1. Introduction

A growing body of evidence suggests that a significant number of industries are encountering mounting challenges due to a shortage of skilled professionals. This shortage is particularly pronounced in the fields of natural sciences, computer science, and engineering. A considerable number of nations, not least Germany, are grappling with this dearth of suitably qualified personnel in STEM-related professions. In 2022, Germany reported a shortage of 326,100 professionals in STEM occupations (IW & bidt, 2022). This skills gap is particularly evident in engineering professions as well as in the energy and electrical engineering sectors (IW & bidt, 2022; VDI & IW, 2024). A similar tendency is evident in German schools, where the lack of qualified teachers in STEM subjects contributes to insufficient foundational competencies among students (IW, 2023), potentially influencing their future educational and career choices.

Against this background, the importance of high-quality STEM education becomes even clearer. As asserted by Renn et al. (2012), STEM education is of pivotal significance in the cultivation of analytical and problem-solving skills on an individual level. Moreover, it is imperative to ensure the future of Germany as a business and innovation location. The provision of high-quality instruction in STEM subjects has been demonstrated to engender a heightened level of technical understanding among students, in addition to cultivating a sense of motivation to engage with technological issues (Lebeaume, 2011). However, the realisation of this objective necessitates the presence of educators who are meticulously prepared. It is imperative to recognise the pivotal role of initial teacher training and continuous professional development in helping teachers develop engaging and effective STEM lessons. This assertion is supported by the findings outlined in the MINT Report (IW, 2023).

Despite the recognised importance of technology within STEM, its position in the curriculum of German elementary schools remains ambiguous. While subjects such as mathematics and science are well established, technical education often lacks a concrete curricular anchor and is frequently embedded in interdisciplinary approaches (de Vries, 2019; Koch et al., 2019). Within the multidisciplinary framework of general studies (Sachunterricht), technical perspectives are under-represented, comprising only 9.8% of the content on a national level (Beutin & Dunker, 2023).

In light of this underrepresentation in the curriculum, craft education assumes particular significance. As one of the few elementary school subjects with an explicit technical focus, its aim is to foster aesthetic and technical competencies. The discipline’s core areas encompass the utilisation and comprehension of tools, construction processes, and the interplay between technology and society. Clearly, craft education plays a pivotal role in promoting technical education from the earliest stages of schooling, thereby demonstrating its substantial potential in fostering STEM competence.

However, the increasing shortage of qualified teachers has led to an increasing reliance on out-of-field teaching, particularly in subjects such as craft education (Keller-Schneider et al., 2016). While general pedagogical competence is necessary, teacher professionalisation also requires subject-specific pedagogical qualifications (Baumert & Kunter, 2011). In practice, teachers who teach subjects outside of their field of expertise often lack the necessary qualifications, especially in subjects such as craft education that demand technical proficiency (Porsch, 2016; Keller et al., 2018). This has given rise to concerns regarding the quality and effectiveness of instruction.

Despite the significance of craft education as part of STEM learning at the elementary level, there is a lack of research on the qualifications of teachers delivering this subject and the factors leading to out-of-field teaching. The present topic is the subject of only a small number of research studies, especially with respect to regional differences and teacher self-perceptions in German federal states. It is imperative to undertake a systematic investigation into the teachers employed in craft education, the professional backgrounds of these instructors, and the correlation between these factors and the implementation of curricula, as well as the quality of instruction.

The present study aims to address the research gap by investigating the professionalisation of teachers responsible for craft education in the federal states of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania (MV), Saxony (SN), and Thuringia (TH). This study focuses on the formal qualifications of the participants, the reasons for teaching out of one’s field of expertise, and the potential differences between federal states. The following research questions are specifically explored:

• What level of professionalisation do teachers who teach craft education at elementary schools in the federal states mentioned have?
• Are there differences in the level of professionalisation between the individual federal states?
• What are the reasons that lead craft education teachers to teach out of their field?

The ensuing sections will delineate the theoretical framework of out-of-field teaching, accompanied by the empirical analysis of survey data collected in MV, SN, and TH. This paper concludes with a discussion of the findings and practical implications for teacher education and professional development.

2. Technical Education as Part of STEM Education at Elementary Schools in Germany

The integration of technical education into elementary school curricula in Germany is subject to considerable variation across federal states. While general studies (Sachunterricht) serve as the elementary framework for science- and society-related topics in most states, explicit references to technical content remain marginal. As recent curriculum analyses have highlighted (Beutin & Dunker, 2023), technical education comprises a relatively modest proportion of the general studies curriculum—at a nationwide level, this is 9.8%, and in the specific cases of MV, SN, and TH, the figure is as low as 0–1.3%. These disparities have the effect of limiting pupils’ exposure to hands-on technical experiences at an early age.

An exception to this trend is evident in the domain of craft education (Werken), which persists in some federal states. In contradistinction to general studies, craft education is characterised by its emphasis on aesthetic, technical, informational, and craft-based instruction (Bauer et al., 2021). This pedagogical approach, which is unique to German elementary schools, represents a significant aspect of their curriculum. The central competency areas of craft education encompass, inter alia, the discovery and understanding of technological interrelations, the utilisation and analysis thereof, the maintenance and care of technical objects, the establishment of relations between technology, the environment, humankind and society, whilst assuming responsibility for one’s own actions, and the production, development, construction, and building of technical objects using various materials and tools. The description of the skills also furnishes an overview of the curriculum for craft education in MV (2013), SN (2019), and TH (2010). The practical nature of the subject, in conjunction with its capacity to engender interest in STEM-related domains, renders it of paramount importance in the initial cultivation of technical literacy.

Nevertheless, in order to implement craft education in an effective manner and ensure its contribution to STEM learning, it is essential to consider teacher professionalisation as a key factor. The notion of professional knowledge as an integral component of teacher professionalisation (Baumert & Kunter, 2011) necessitates not only pedagogical skills for craft education but also subject-specific expertise in areas such as materials science, tool handling, and safety. However, a significant proportion of the teaching staff currently responsible for craft education have not received specialised training in these areas (Beutin et al., 2023).

This phenomenon can be considered a manifestation of the broader issue of out-of-field teaching (Keller-Schneider et al., 2016), a practice that has become increasingly prevalent due to ongoing teacher shortages. It is a common occurrence for teachers to be assigned to teach subjects that fall outside their designated area of qualification. These assignments are often made on the basis of informal experience, personal interest, or necessity. While this practice assists in maintaining the operational integrity of the educational institution (KMK, 2022), it gives rise to significant inquiries concerning the quality of instruction (Baumert & Kunter, 2011; du Plessis, 2013; Hammel, 2011; Törner & Törner, 2012) and the capacity of teachers to facilitate substantial learning experiences within technically challenging disciplines.

The concept of out-of-field teaching is therefore of central relevance when examining the current state of craft education in Germany’s elementary schools. The subsequent section delineates the theoretical framework of out-of-field teaching and defines the criteria for professionalisation that form the basis for the present empirical study.

3. Out-of-Field Teaching in STEM Education

Out-of-field teaching refers to the principle in which teachers instruct subjects for which they do not have formal teaching qualifications, specific training, or expertise (du Plessis et al., 2014; Porsch, 2016). This absence of formal qualification can encompass teaching subjects outside one’s area of specialisation, in addition to teaching across different grade levels or even within diverse school types (Hobbs & Porsch, 2021).

Porsch (2016) proposes a more precise classification system, which divides teachers into three distinct groups: autodidacts, semi-professionals, and experts. This categorisation is based on teachers’ subject-specific qualifications. The autodidact group refers to educators who instruct a subject for which they possess no formal teaching qualification. It is evident that this subject was not included in their academic curriculum or was not included in the training programme for prospective teachers. The semi-professional group comprises teachers with a range of educational backgrounds. In this case, the subject was studied with an elementary focus on subject-specific pedagogical skills. Furthermore, while the subject may have been included in their teacher training, this is not a prerequisite. Furthermore, these teachers may hold a teaching qualification for the subject, resulting in a heterogeneous level of subject-specific qualification within this group. In contrast, teachers who have studied a subject with both subject-specific and subject-didactic content, and who have completed their teacher training with that subject, belong to the expert group (Porsch, 2016).

According to this classification, specialist teachers can be assigned to the group of experts, as they have acquired specific subject-specific pedagogical skills and qualifications through both the first phase (academic studies) and the second phase (teacher training) of their education. Conversely, the autodidact group can be categorically classified as out-of-field teachers. The classification of semi-professionals is a more complex matter due to the heterogeneity of this group. As initially defined by Hobbs and Porsch (2021), out-of-field teaching is defined as instruction without qualification in the respective subject, grade level, or school type. It is therefore possible that semi-professionals may also be classified as such. The heterogeneity observed within the semi-professional group necessitates a more detailed examination. The ‘Ländergemeinsamen inhaltlichen Anforderungen für die Fachwissenschaften und Fachdidaktiken in der Lehrerbildung’ (KMK, 2010) stipulate nationwide content requirements for subject disciplines and subject-specific pedagogical skills in teacher education in Germany. These requirements include a definition of elementary education-specific competence profiles. Consequently, it can be assumed that fully trained elementary school teachers (holders of the First and Second State Examination) have acquired elementary school competencies. Nevertheless, the development of subject-specific competencies is confined to the subjects that have been studied. Given the pivotal role of subject expertise, particularly in technically oriented subjects (Keller et al., 2018), a further delineation within the semi-professional group becomes evident for educators imparting craft education. This process gives rise to two distinct subgroups:

(1)

Teachers who are professionally qualified in the field of technology, though not necessarily in elementary schools, are to be sought.

This group comprises teachers who have studied a technical or related subject for secondary education, but who have not received specific training for teaching technology in elementary schools. To illustrate, one may consider educators specialising in labour studies, Wirtschaft-Arbeit-Technik (WAT), or technology who were trained for secondary schools. For instance, this includes a teacher who studied Wirtschaft-Arbeit-Technik (consolidation of the subject’s economics, labour, and technology) for secondary levels and now teaches craft education in elementary schools without having undergone specific pedagogical skills training for this level.

(2)

Secondly, the subject of this investigation is elementary school teachers who do not possess specific training in craft education.

These teachers have completed a degree in elementary school education and studied various subjects (e.g., maths or art) with a focus on elementary school didactics. However, it is evident that they lack subject-specific pedagogical skills training in the domain of craft education or technology. To illustrate this point, one may consider the case of an elementary school teacher who, as part of their teacher training programme, pursued a course of study in general studies, devoid of a particular emphasis on technical or practical work. Notwithstanding this, they provide instruction in craft education due to the absence of teachers with specialist training at their school.

This distinction within the semi-professionals highlights that the classification of teachers as out-of-field teachers in craft education can stem from different factors, either a lack of elementary school competencies or a lack of technical subject training. In accordance with this classification, semi-professionals are designated as out-of-field teachers within the scope of this study.

The primary rationale for the employment of teachers who lack subject-specific qualifications pertains to the previously mentioned teacher shortage, a phenomenon that impacts various subjects and school types to differing extents. Furthermore, instances of illness-related absenteeism, in conjunction with the subsequent necessity for substitute teachers lacking subject-specific expertise, also exert a significant influence. Depending on the combination of subjects and the demand for teaching hours, it may be unavoidable that teaching is undertaken in a field other than that in which the teacher is qualified. This pedagogical approach is particularly prevalent in elementary schools in Germany, where the class teacher principle often results in a single teacher overseeing multiple subjects, such as mathematics, art, or music. A key benefit of this pedagogical approach is that it establishes a consistent point of contact between teacher and students, thereby facilitating interdisciplinary learning and offering greater opportunities for diagnosis and individualised support, given the extended teaching time allotted within a single class (Hammel, 2011).

Nevertheless, teaching out of the field can carry inherent risks. These factors have the potential to exert a detrimental influence on the well-being of teaching professionals (Porsch & Wendt, 2015), the quality of teaching (Baumert & Kunter, 2011; du Plessis, 2013; Hammel, 2011; Törner & Törner, 2012) and, moreover, on the academic achievements of students (Rjosk et al., 2017; Van Overschelde, 2022). It has been demonstrated that out-of-field teachers frequently exhibit deficiencies in their capacity to effectively manage classroom environments (du Plessis, 2013) and tend to rely on teacher-centred instructional methodologies (Hammel, 2011). In subjects such as maths, there is also a risk that they revert to outdated teaching methods, handle mistakes in a way that is not conducive to learning, and place disproportionate emphasis on certain aspects (Törner & Törner, 2012). As demonstrated in the relevant literature, lower-achieving students appear to benefit less from instruction delivered by teachers who do not specialise in the subject area than they do from lessons taught by subject specialists (Richter et al., 2012; du Plessis, 2013). Additionally, out-of-field teachers often do not have well-established teaching and learning beliefs, a factor that exerts a significant influence on their instructional design (Bosse & Törner, 2015). It has been demonstrated that a substantial proportion of teaching professionals perceive a deficiency in their subject knowledge and instructional competence (Hammel, 2011; Hobbs, 2013; Bosse & Törner, 2015). These perceived knowledge gaps have been shown to be associated with low self-efficacy in their teaching abilities, which in turn has a negative impact on instruction (Hobbs, 2013; du Plessis et al., 2014; Porsch & Wendt, 2015).

The extent of teaching out-of-field in Germany is evident in the IQB Education trend. In 2012, 17% of German teachers and 27% of math teachers at elementary schools in Germany were teaching without subject-specific training (Richter et al., 2013). By 2016, these proportions had increased to 19% in German and 31% in math (Rjosk et al., 2017). Furthermore, substantial discrepancies are evident among the federal states. However, for many subjects, there is still an absence of reliable data on the extent of out-of-field teaching (Landtag MV, 2019; Lange, 2018). The present study aims to contribute to the existing body of knowledge by providing additional data regarding craft education as part of STEM education in elementary schools.

4. State of Research

A section of this study on the extent of out-of-field teaching in craft education has previously been published by Beutin et al. (2023). The results of this study refer exclusively to the federal state of SN. The present study examined the educational background of craft education teachers in SN and classified them into the groups of experts, semi-professionals, and autodidacts. In accordance with the aforementioned classifications, the status of out-of-field teachers was also determined. Furthermore, this study investigated the reasons why teachers in SN are required to teach craft education outside their field of expertise. In addition, teachers were invited to express their preferences for future improvements to the subject area. The findings indicated that 54% of the instruction was delivered by teachers with subject-specific training, while the remaining 46% was conducted by out-of-field teachers. The predominant rationales for out-of-field teaching instruction encompassed a lack of qualified teachers, personal enthusiasm for the discipline, and antecedent experience or professional development pertaining to craft education (Beutin et al., 2023).

This article builds upon that study by incorporating additional data from MV and TH to expand the analysis of out-of-field teaching in craft education. The coding framework for the reasons behind out-of-field teaching has been revised and expanded based on the new dataset, allowing for a renewed evaluation of the findings.

5. Methodology

5.1. Hypotheses

The present study investigates the professionalisation of craft education teachers in elementary schools across MV, SN, and TH, with a focus on out-of-field teaching. The following hypotheses are formulated on the basis of extant literature on teacher qualifications and subject-specific competence (Baumert & Kunter, 2011; Porsch, 2016), and considering the structural challenges within German STEM education (de Vries, 2019), together with the findings of research on the subject:

H1: A considerable proportion of craft education teachers in MV, SN, and TH lack formal subject-specific qualifications, reflecting a low level of professionalisation. This hypothesis is grounded in findings that out-of-field teaching is common in STEM subjects due to teacher shortages and curricular ambiguities (Keller-Schneider et al., 2016; IW, 2023).

H2: The level of professionalisation among craft education teachers significantly differs across the federal states of MV, SN, and TH. This reflects the known heterogeneity in curricular frameworks and teacher education systems in Germany’s federal states (de Vries, 2019; Beutin et al., 2023).

H3: Teachers’ reasons for out-of-field teaching primarily relate to systemic factors such as teacher shortages, alongside individual factors that include personal interests and prior informal experience or professional development rather than formal qualification. This hypothesis follows research highlighting motivational and contextual factors influencing out-of-field teaching practices (Keller et al., 2018; Porsch, 2016).

The empirical testing of these hypotheses will provide insights into the extent and causes of out-of-field teaching in craft education. This, in turn, will inform targeted policy and professional development measures to enhance STEM teacher professionalisation at the elementary level.

5.2. Study Design

The data used in this study were collected through an online survey of teachers who teach craft education in elementary schools in MV, SN, and TH. The finalised questionnaire was dispatched via email to the head teachers of the aforementioned federal states, with a request that they forward it to the craft education teachers. The data collection process was conducted in SN in May 2023 and in MV and TH between September and November 2023.

5.3. Instrument

Data were collected via an online questionnaire using Evasys. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. Incomplete or implausible responses were excluded from the analysis. Informed consent was obtained from all participants at the beginning of the survey. This study complied with all relevant data protection and ethical guidelines.

The questionnaire included a set of closed questions to record participants’ professional training and qualifications for teaching craft education. The response categories were based on all common training routes for elementary school teachers in Germany, including options reflecting historical pathways such as those from the former GDR. To account for non-standard career paths, open-ended response options were provided (“Other, please specify”), and all responses were subsequently coded and assigned to one of the main qualification groups (“experts”, “semi-professionals”, and “autodidacts”, according to Porsch, 2016).

As these questions capture objective, biographical data (e.g., degree obtained, vocational training), conventional measures of psychometric reliability (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha) are neither applicable nor meaningful. Content validity was ensured by covering all known formal qualification routes, including historical variants.

The coding of the open-ended responses followed established rules, and all cases were reviewed by at least two members of the research team to ensure consistent assignment.

5.4. Sample

A self-selection sampling technique was employed (Döring & Bortz, 2016). The questionnaire was sent to head teachers of all elementary schools in the federal states of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Saxony, and Thuringia (N = 1467: 206 in MV, 856 in SN, and 405 in TH), with the request to forward it to teachers responsible for craft education. Teachers who chose to participate did so voluntarily, resulting in a non-probability, self-selected sample. While this approach enables access to a broad pool of relevant teachers, it has limitations for statistical representativeness.

The resulting sample consists of 284 craft education teachers. The sample characteristics are outlined in

Table 1. Sample characteristics.

Variable	Characterisation	Percent	Absolute
Federal state	MV	9.2	26
	SN	50.7	144
	TH	40.1	114
Gender	Female	85.9	244
	Male	14.1	40
Age	<30 years	16.9	48
	31–40 years	19.4	55
	41–50 years	15.8	45
	51–60 years	36.3	103
	>60 years	11.6	33
Sponsorship	Public	94.4	268
	Private	4.9	14
	not specified	0.7	2
School-leaving certificate	A-levels	56.7	161
	max. entrance qualification for universities of applied sciences	40.5	115
	not specified	2.8	8

.

5.5. Data Analysis

A descriptive quantitative analysis was used to address the first two research questions. A chi-squared test was performed in order to ascertain whether there was a statistically significant relationship between the federal states and the level of professionalisation. Furthermore, the strength of the correlation was analysed using Pearson and Spearman correlations.

To address the third research question, open responses were analysed using Kuckartz’s (2018) content-structuring method. The coding process was conducted using an inductive approach, with the developed categories being systematically assigned to the coding. In order to ensure consistent categorisation, representative text passages selected as anchor examples and discussed by the authors are employed. The establishment of coding rules was a response to the necessity of ensuring the clear assignment of meaning units. The final categorisation of the data material was conducted by two independent coders. The analysis was conducted on a series of clearly defined, assignable meaning units, with responses that were ambiguous or unclear assigned to the category of ‘not classifiable’.

6. Results

6.1. Level of Professionalisation

To address the first research question, the respondents were classified as experts, semi-professionals, or autodidacts according to their craft education training, following Porsch (2016). As demonstrated in Figure 1, 62.0% of the craft education teachers surveyed can be classified as experts. A further 29.6% of respondents are classified as semi-professionals, while 8.5% of respondents are categorised as autodidacts. It is estimated that approximately one-third of craft education teachers do not possess formal qualifications in the subject they are teaching.

6.2. Differences Between the Federal States

To address research question 2, this study examined the qualification levels of teachers in craft education across the federal states.

Figure 1 illustrates the distribution of teachers responsible for teaching craft education at elementary schools in the selected federal states, with these teachers categorised by their level of professionalisation. The results indicate that the proportion of experts is highest in TH at 73.7%, followed by SN (54.9%) and MV (50.0%). The highest proportion of semi-professionals was observed in SN (34.7%), whereas the shares in MV (30.8%) and TH (22.8%) were comparatively lower. The group of autodidacts is under-represented in general, with the highest proportion in MV (19.2%), followed by SN (10.4%), and the lowest value in TH (3.5%).

The analysis resulted in a Pearson chi-square value of χ²(4) = 14.896, p = 0.005. This demonstrated a significant correlation between the federal state and the level of professionalisation of the teachers. The computed correlation coefficients are r = −0.215 and ρ = −0.211, both of which are highly significant (p < 0.001). The negative values indicate that the relative frequency of certain groups (e.g., autodidacts) in the federal states decreases as the degree of professionalisation increases.

The results indicate substantial disparities in the degree of professionalisation among the federal states. The highest level of professionalisation is exhibited by TH, while MV demonstrates the highest proportion of autodidacts. This discrepancy may be ascribed to variations in training opportunities, professional entry requirements, or structural differences in teacher education across the respective states. The calculated correlations demonstrate that the association between federal state and professionalisation is statistically significant, albeit not particularly pronounced. This finding suggests the possibility of other factors, in addition to the federal state, which may also influence the professionalisation of teachers.

6.3. Reasons for the Deployment of Out-of-Field Teachers in Craft Education

In order to address the third research question, the open responses provided by the surveyed elementary school teachers were subjected to categorisation (

Table 2. Categories, code distribution, and illustrative quotations.

Category	Code Distribution	Illustrative Quotes
Teacher shortage	66 (53.7%)	There are not enough qualified teachers for the subject of craft education at our school. For this reason, years 1 and 2 are taught outside of the subject.
Interest and pleasure in the subject	18 (14.6%)	I am enthusiastic about craft education activities and enjoy teaching craft education, especially in grades 1 and 2.
Previous experience/training partially available	11 (8.9%)	I have passed the 1st state examination in the subject of works.
Allocation by the school leadership	9 (7.3%)	I don’t know, especially as I said in my application that I don’t think I’m good at craft education. I’ve been a craft education teacher since my first day of teaching.
Creativity/ Craftsmanship	7 (5.7%)	Because I have experience in teaching at elementary school and I am skilful and creative.
Completed further/ advanced training	6 (4.9%)	Qualification with self-initiative with the specialist manager, various further training courses
Class teacher principle	4 (3.3%)	[…] at elementary school, all “minor subjects” must also be taught outside the subject area.
Voluntariness	2 (1.6%)	I made myself available voluntarily.

). The qualitative analysis indicated that the shortage of teachers at elementary schools in the three federal states surveyed was a key reason for out-of-field teaching, as indicated in 66 (53.7%) responses (n = 123). To a significantly lesser extent, personal interest and motivation of the subject were cited as reasons for out-of-field teaching in 18 responses (14.6%). Some respondents noted that prior experience or partial initial training in a related field was a contributing factor (8.9%). Furthermore, nine responses (7.3%) of respondents identified the school administration’s assignment policy as a contributing factor to teaching that was not aligned with their field of expertise.

To a lesser extent, personal skills such as creativity and craftsmanship were cited as reasons for teaching out of the field, which was only mentioned in seven responses (5.7%). Additionally, a total of six responses (4.9%) alluded to subject-specific further training or professional development. The class teacher principle, in which one teacher is responsible for several subjects, was mentioned on four occasions (3.3%) as the reason for teaching out of the field. In only two cases (1.6%) was voluntariness cited as the decisive factor.

7. Discussion

Craft education, a fundamental component of the elementary school curriculum, assumes a pivotal role within the broader context of STEM education at the elementary level in Germany. Notwithstanding the paramount importance of technical education, craft education remains under-represented in elementary schools, as evidenced by the paucity of lessons allocated to it. In order to ensure the quality of education, it is reasonable to demand that technical education be taught by teachers who are adequately qualified (DGfE, 2017). The objective of this study was to examine the level of professionalisation of teachers who teach craft education and to identify the reasons behind this.

A comparison of the present results with those of the IQB Trend (Richter et al., 2013; Rjosk et al., 2017) regarding the issue of out-of-field teaching reveals that the figures exceed previous numbers. Furthermore, the survey revealed that 38% of surveyed teachers who teach craft education have no specific technical or didactic qualifications. The semi-professionals (29.5%) had received some form of technical education or elementary school didactics. Nevertheless, it should be noted that this does not necessarily align with the didactic requirements of craft education. Furthermore, 8.5% of the surveyed teachers who self-identify as autodidacts had not received technical training or completed elementary school education. These findings support hypothesis 1, which anticipated that a significant proportion of craft education teachers lack formal qualifications in technical and subject-specific pedagogical skills domains.

It is imperative that these results are interpreted with a high degree of differentiation. In the context of MV, craft education lessons are predominantly delivered by educators lacking specific qualifications (50%), while in SN, this practice is less prevalent (45.1%). Notably, in TH, the proportion of teachers who teach out-of-field craft education is the lowest (26.3%). These findings indicate that the situation is particularly critical in the case of technically oriented subjects in comparison to German and mathematics lessons. Nevertheless, it is imperative to acknowledge that a direct comparison between these figures is precluded by the inherent differences in their operationalisation. However, these findings unequivocally underscore the severity of the circumstances in MV and SN. This confirms hypothesis 2, which predicted significant differences between federal states regarding the professionalisation of craft education teachers.

This has far-reaching implications for both the quality of instruction and students’ learning processes. As Hammel (2011) has demonstrated, teachers who lack the requisite subject-specific qualifications in craft education are more inclined to rely on teacher-centred instructional methods. This approach has the potential to engender a decline in student engagement and motivation, as the technical nature of subjects such as craft education necessitates a significant degree of practical application and specialised knowledge, which is not optimally taught through conventional frontal teaching methods. Teachers who recognise their own lack of expertise often perceive their subject-specific pedagogical skills as insufficient (Bosse & Törner, 2015). Consequently, the quality of instruction provided may be suboptimal, and the instructors’ competence in utilising tools and manufacturing techniques may be questionable. This, in turn, risks the loss of a solid understanding of technical concepts and the correct application of tools and procedures, potentially diminishing students’ long-term interest in the subject. This outcome is at odds with the objective of cultivating enthusiasm for technical professions and STEM subjects. Furthermore, an exclusive emphasis on specific subject areas, such as handicrafts with paper, which are more readily implementable by teachers, can result in the disregard of other crucial topics (Törner & Törner, 2012). Consequently, instruction that is not aligned with the subject matter may compromise the depth of students’ technical knowledge and hinder their overall development and potential in the field.

Furthermore, an analysis of the data reveals that 136 of the 286 teachers classified as subject specialists (Porsch, 2016) are over 50 years of age. As these educators retire due to age, it is anticipated that the situation will deteriorate. German professional associations have expressed a critical view of this development, issuing warnings of a significant erosion of professionalism in the elementary school system (DGfE, 2017). This is a particularly salient issue given the pivotal role of elementary education as the inaugural stage of education, as it engenders a paucity of continuity in technically oriented subjects at the secondary level.

To summarise, the professionalisation of teachers in craft education at elementary schools is not distributed evenly across federal states. The significant differences suggest that structural and educational policy frameworks influence the level of professionalisation. It is recommended that future research endeavours focus on the identification of the underlying causes of these disparities.

The reasons for teaching out of the field are manifold, although the shortage of teachers is clearly the primary cause. The motivation of teachers to teach subjects outside of their specialism, stemming from motivation and interest in the subject, has been demonstrated to positively impact the intrinsic motivation of teachers and, consequently, the quality of teaching (Schiefele & Schaffner, 2015; Schiefele, 2009). It is evident that previous experience, partial training, and the completion of further or advanced training can relate to both subject-specific pedagogical skills. These two factors have the potential to provide a supportive environment for teachers who are not specialised in their field. This finding lends support to hypothesis 3, which assumed that teacher shortages, interest, and previous experience constitute the most common reasons for teaching craft education out of the field.

The assignment of teachers to craft education by school leadership without corresponding qualifications is often made for organisational reasons. This approach has been demonstrated to assist in the maintenance of school operations, the resolution of scheduling issues, and the prevention of class cancellations (Hobbs & Porsch, 2021). The class teacher principle, a frequently applied pedagogical strategy in elementary education, has been shown to benefit younger children by providing a familiar and trusted figure (Hammel, 2011). However, in subjects that are technically and practically oriented, this principle presents challenges, as specific expertise and a secure handling of tools are required.

A number of the cited rationales may be ascribed directly to the paucity of teachers, causing a structural compulsion to employ those who are not qualified to teach. This finding suggests that the actual impact of the teacher shortage on out-of-field teaching in craft education is greater than the 66 mentions might imply. A significant proportion of the individual reasons provided, such as interest in the subject or prior experience, could be interpreted as a consequence of the necessity to ensure the continuity of educational instruction in the absence of qualified subject teachers. To a lesser extent, personal skills such as creativity and craftsmanship were cited as reasons for out-of-field teaching, which was only mentioned in seven responses (5.7%). Furthermore, a total of six responses (4.9%) alluded to subject-specific further training or professional development. The class teacher principle, in which one teacher is responsible for several subjects, was mentioned four times (3.3%) as the reason for out-of-field teaching. Voluntariness was cited as the decisive factor in only two cases (1.6%).

In order to address these challenges, it is essential to implement educational policy and content-related measures that span all phases of teacher education (KMK, 2021). It is imperative that higher education institutions enhance their teacher education curriculum to ensure that future educators are adequately prepared to teach beyond the confines of their academic specialisation. It is, therefore, essential to develop competencies that enable them to deliver high-quality instruction in non-specialist subjects. In particular, greater emphasis should be placed on the integration of technical content in teacher education programs. Furthermore, it is imperative that teacher preparation programmes place a greater emphasis on technical education. In MV, the teacher training curriculum places a particular emphasis on the subjects of German and mathematics (LehVDVO M-V, 2013, § 8). This indicates that there is no specific preparation for teaching craft education.

In addition to improving teacher education, the provision of targeted professional development and continuing education programmes is imperative in order to provide support to schools and teachers in their instructional practice and to alleviate their workload. A quality-assured upskilling process for teachers who are instructing outside their area of expertise plays a crucial role in ensuring long-term teaching quality. It is imperative that professional development initiatives are not only content-rich but also methodologically well-structured, taking into consideration teachers’ prior experiences, existing knowledge, as well as their beliefs and attitudes (Guskey, 2002). An exemplar of such a qualification measure is the “Werkzeugführerschein” (literally, “tool driver’s licence”, a certified training course in the safe handling of tools) offered through the online learning platform Offene Uni (Open University) at the University of Rostock. This programme is specifically focused on subject-specific upskilling in craft education.

Furthermore, targeted upskilling programmes for career changers and lateral entrants have the potential to address the ongoing teacher shortage. In addition to external professional development opportunities, school-based mentoring structures could provide valuable support by offering hands-on learning experiences and subject-specific guidance to teachers instructing outside their area of expertise. However, the implementation of this approach necessitates the presence of appropriately trained personnel at each educational institution. In the long term, it is imperative to enhance the number of qualified teachers and to ensure a more equitable distribution of these educators across schools in order to sustainably guarantee subject-specific instruction (Hobbs & Porsch, 2021).

8. Limitation

The present study is of an exploratory character, which necessitates critical reflection on the validity of the findings, considering several limitations. It is acknowledged that the generalisability of the results is limited due to the variation in school frameworks that is present across federal states. Furthermore, it is important to note that certain factors may have an impact on the internal validity of the findings. The sample obtained is a self-selection sample (Döring & Bortz, 2016), which means that potential biases cannot be ruled out. It is conceivable that both teachers’ perceived workload and their particular interest in the topic influenced their willingness to participate in the survey. Moreover, the sampling method and the study’s open research approach resulted in the omission of detailed analyses of school-structural variables. A further limitation pertains to the classification of teachers in accordance with Porsch (2020). The categorisation in question is predicated exclusively on formal qualifications, encompassing subjects studied and teaching certifications. Whilst individual factors such as personal motivation or interest in the subject may potentially have an impact on teaching quality, these elements are not given consideration in this study.

9. Conclusions

The presented study examined the professionalisation of teachers in craft education and the reasons for out-of-field teaching in this subject area in German elementary schools. The findings revealed a high proportion of out-of-field teaching, with considerable differences across federal states. In MV and SN, the situation appears to be particularly critical, while TH shows comparatively lower rates of out-of-field teaching staff. The data underscore that many craft education lessons are delivered by teachers without subject-specific pedagogical qualifications. This has serious implications for the quality of instruction and student learning outcomes (Baumert & Kunter, 2011; du Plessis, 2013; Hammel, 2011; Törner & Törner, 2012).

This study also highlighted that many educators are assigned to craft education due to structural necessities stemming from the ongoing teacher shortage. Although intrinsic motivation, previous experience, and partial training were often cited as reasons, these are usually more a matter of planning decisions made by school management. The teacher shortage exerts structural pressure on schools, leading to pragmatic decisions that ensure lesson coverage (KMK, 2022) but do not necessarily guarantee instructional quality.

In light of the aforementioned challenges, it is imperative to implement educational policy and structural measures across all phases of teacher education (KMK, 2021). It is recommended that universities place greater emphasis on technical content in initial training, especially in federal states where it is currently under-represented. Furthermore, the importance of professionally designed continuing education programmes, such as the “Werkzeugführerschein” offered by the University of Rostock, in supporting teachers who are not specialists in their field, cannot be overstated. The implementation of school-based career changer programmes and targeted upskilling initiatives may also contribute to the mitigation of the issue (Tellisch, 2020), provided that there is a sufficient supply of qualified mentors.

The findings of this study underscore the necessity for a coordinated initiative to enhance the qualifications of teachers in technically oriented subjects. It is recommended that future research endeavours focus on investigating the underlying structural factors that contribute to regional disparities. Additionally, there is a need to assess the long-term effectiveness of professional development initiatives. It is imperative to acknowledge that the efficacy of craft education is contingent upon the calibre of the instructors imparting this knowledge. The utilisation of qualified teachers is paramount for the cultivation of technical proficiencies, the promotion of student engagement in STEM disciplines (Renn et al., 2012), and the realisation of the overarching objectives of educational equity and quality.