Professional Development and Teacher Research in Initial Teacher Education: Perceptions of Pre-Service and In-Service Teachers

Abstract

Initial teacher education is increasingly expected to prepare pre-service teachers for ongoing professional development and teacher research, yet it remains unclear how systematically these competences are embedded in programmes and how prepared pre-service teachers feel. We used a mixed-methods design, combining a content analysis of 47 teacher education programmes at the University of Ljubljana with two cross-sectional surveys involving 443 pre-service (303 enrolled in first-cycle programmes and 140 in second-cycle programmes) and 138 in-service teachers. Programme documents frequently referenced professional development and research; however, research was more often stated as a competence outcome than as an explicit programme goal. In the surveys, pre-service teachers rated teaching competences highly, whereas perceived current competence was lower for professional development and lowest for teacher research, particularly for active research engagement. Across all items, pre-service teachers reported substantial gaps between current and required competence. Perceived current competence increased with study stage, while required competence varied less by stage. Required competence ratings were largely aligned between pre-service and in-service teachers, although pre-service teachers assigned higher ratings to selected research engagement items. The findings indicate a misalignment between curricular emphasis and perceived preparedness, and support stronger integration of practice-embedded professional learning and inquiry across coursework.

1. Introduction

The quality of the education system depends largely on teachers and other professionals employed in schools, which is why countries regulate their education to some extent (e.g., entry requirements for studies, duration of education, level of education required for the profession, and the knowledge and competences that pre-service teachers should acquire during their studies) and strive to ensure that teachers are as well educated as possible. Research evidence indicates that teachers clearly contribute to student learning and achievement (Guerriero, 2017; Michalak, 2011; Symeonidis, 2018) and that the quality of teachers depends on the quality of their initial education (European Commission, 2005, 2007). “The quality of teachers has a larger impact on the learning of pupils than the quality of the curriculum, the teaching methods, the school building or the role of parents” (Snoek et al., 2010, pp. 33–34). Initial teacher education is the first crucial stage in a teacher’s professional journey (Caena, 2014), as it lays the foundations of knowledge and a professional mindset for pre-service teachers. However, there have been ongoing debates about which competences pre-service teachers should acquire and which topics or courses should be included in initial teacher education. Shulman (1987) already warned that it is not enough for a successful teacher to possess only content knowledge; they must also have general pedagogical knowledge (including broad principles and strategies of classroom management), curriculum knowledge, knowledge of learners and their characteristics, knowledge of educational contexts (ranging from the workings of the group or classroom, the governance and financing of school districts, to the character of communities and cultures), knowledge of educational ends, purposes, and values and their philosophical and historical foundations. Especially important is pedagogical content knowledge, which represents the blending of content and pedagogy into an understanding of how particular topics, problems, or issues are organised, represented, and adapted to the diverse interests and abilities of learners, and presented for instruction. For example, this relationship between the scientific foundation and professional practice is also reflected in the design of the curricula of Austrian teacher training programmes. Pre-service teachers now learn the basics of educational and social theory, teaching and learning, school development, methodology, and research practice. Developing critical thinking and (self-)reflection skills and methods for researching one’s teaching activities are also essential components of these courses (Kink-Hampersberger et al., 2023).

In Europe, the most significant changes in initial teacher education began with the beginning of the so-called Bologna Process, which aimed to create a unified European higher education system (Zgaga, 2006). One of the innovations introduced by the Bologna Process was the expression of study achievements in terms of competences acquired through a study programme. Competences are understood as composite capacities that include both discursive and practical knowledge, representing a dynamic combination of knowledge, understanding, skills, abilities, and values that lead to effective action in the real world (Shidiq et al., 2022; Tancig, 2006). The Common European Principles for Teacher Competences and Qualifications (Zgaga, 2006) provided the basis for renewing education study programmes, grounded in four principles and three sets of competences. The principles were (1) teaching as a highly qualified profession, (2) situated in the context of lifelong learning, (3) mobile, and based on (4) partnership. The three sets of competences were: competence to work with others, competence to work with knowledge, and competence to work with and in society. The main purpose of initial teacher education programmes thus became the development of competences relevant to a specific field, meaning that teachers must use their theoretical knowledge and skills so they can solve even the most complex problems in practice. At the same time, their attitude towards particular content is also important. If they have a positive attitude towards a specific content and understand its importance and the reasons for it, the likelihood of their success in facing the most demanding challenges in practice is significantly higher.

Social changes and technological developments have shown that initial teacher education programmes must be continually updated and adapted to meet the current needs of society and the characteristics of students. Analyses of policy documents (e.g., Bianchi et al., 2022; European Commission, 2019, 2021; Redecker, 2017; United Nations General Assembly, 2015) in the field of initial teacher education indicate that social and political demands on teachers have been escalating, leading to confusion over the specific competences pre-service teachers should acquire. In parallel, initial teacher education programmes have been subject to continuous reform in recent decades. The debate has centred on the demands for teacher qualification levels, the competences that teacher education graduates need to acquire as they transition to school (Vogrinc & Saqipi, 2023). At the same time, the work of teachers has never been more challenging. Demands on teachers are increasing as schools become more diverse and curricula strive to keep pace with our ever-changing world (Williamson & Moore, 2021), and teachers should know how to respond to the demand for almost individualised learning. The fact is that pre-service teachers cannot acquire all the competences required to perform their work to a high standard during their studies; instead, they must continue to develop their competences and maintain their professional development throughout their careers. A new quality culture in teacher education, based on professional development, needs to be established (European Commission, 2007). Over the past two decades, research-based teacher education has been extensively studied, encompassing both the training of teachers as researchers and the integration of research evidence into teaching. In response to evolving conceptions of teacher professionalism, teacher education has increasingly emphasised research skills and theoretical preparation, reflecting both advances in professional standards and the permanent changes in classroom practice (Saqipi & Vogrinc, 2020). It is therefore sensible to focus on developing competences during initial teacher education that enable teachers to manage their own professional development, participate in lifelong education and learning, and research their pedagogical practice, allowing them to adapt to the evolving demands of society and students. Teachers are also responsible for extending the boundaries of professional knowledge through a commitment to reflective practice and research (European Commission, 2007).

Study Aim and Research Questions

This study combines a document analysis of content areas and competence statements across initial teacher education programmes at the University of Ljubljana with survey data from a competence-profile questionnaire developed within the project Modernisation of Pedagogical Study Programmes. Although the project addresses a wide range of competences, including digital competence and sustainability competence, this article focuses on two fundamental competences that should be developed during initial teacher education: care for professional development and the ability to research pedagogical practice. The analyses in this paper, therefore, use a subset of domains from the questionnaire that capture professional development orientation and engagement with research. We examined the extent to which these competences are integrated into initial teacher education programmes and how they are perceived and self-assessed by pre-service and in-service teachers.

To guide this investigation, the following research questions were formulated:

RQ1: Which content areas are most frequently included in existing initial teacher education programmes, and to what extent are professional development and teacher research systematically integrated?

RQ2: To what extent do pre-service teachers report their current perceived competence in professional development and teacher research?

RQ3: Is there a statistically significant difference between pre-service teachers’ current perceived competence and the level of competence they perceive as necessary in professional development and teacher research?

RQ4: Is there a statistically significant difference in perceived current and required competence for professional development and teacher research among pre-service teachers at different stages of their initial teacher education?

RQ5: Is there a statistically significant difference between in-service and pre-service teachers in their perceptions of the competence level required in professional development and teacher research?

2. Literature Review

2.1. Teachers’ Professional Development

Professional development encompasses a teacher’s personal, professional, and social dimensions, and signifies progress towards critical, independent, and responsible decision-making and behaviour (Valenčič Zuljan, 2001). Teacher professional development is a complex and comprehensive process that requires both cognitive and emotional engagement from teachers and involves multiple elements, including knowledge acquisition, skill development, active participation, reflective practice, and collaboration. It also demands the capacity and willingness to examine personal mindset and beliefs, as well as to consider and implement appropriate alternatives for improvement or change (Avalos, 2011; Zuo & Chen, 2025). We understand a teacher’s professional development as a combination of knowledge, competences, and attitudes that enable them to plan their own learning, receive feedback, and implement improvements in their teaching practice. A teacher’s professional development begins with initial teacher education, continues with entry into the teaching profession, and extends throughout their entire career. “As it’s a must for teachers to continuously strive to keep up with the ever-changing landscape of knowledge, evolving student needs, and the demands of society” (Zuo & Chen, 2025, p. 81).

In the past, teacher professional development focused primarily on formal learning within educational institutions, leading to recognised diplomas or certificates of participation (e.g., in-service training programmes, workshops, seminars, conferences, formal mentoring programmes). Today, informal forms of learning are also acknowledged, which can occur in the workplace (e.g., peer teaching, demonstration lessons, study groups, collaborative planning, mentoring between colleagues), as well as through occasional learning (Postholm, 2018; Zuo & Chen, 2025). Such learning does not necessarily require the individual to recognise it as contributing to their knowledge and competences, yet it can significantly enhance professional development, for example, through reflection and self-evaluation of pedagogical work (Vogrinc & Valenčič Zuljan, 2009). The diversity of strategies for teacher professional development is logical, as no single strategy is suitable for everyone (Guskey, 1994, 2003). Individual differences between teachers (such as knowledge, experience, learning styles, and personality traits), characteristics of individual schools (including relationships between colleagues and school management style), and characteristics of students (such as knowledge, motivation, and work habits) significantly influence the teacher learning process and help determine which strategy is most appropriate at a given time and in a particular situation.

Teachers’ professional development should result in sustained improvements in teaching, motivate teachers to change their practice, and have a positive impact on students’ achievement (Desimone, 2009; Sims et al., 2025). As Desimone (2009) noted, education reform is often synonymous with teachers’ professional development, as many school reforms depend on teacher learning and improved instruction. However, as Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) reported, research indicates that many professional development initiatives are ineffective at supporting changes in teacher practice and student learning. Accordingly, the authors identified the features of effective professional development: (1) content-focused; (2) incorporates active learning; (3) supports collaboration; (4) uses models of effective practice; (5) provides coaching and expert support; (6) offers feedback and reflection; and (7) is of sustained duration.

Saderholm et al. (2024) stated that teachers’ professional development should include collaborative methods to systematically investigate and improve teaching practice. This approach to professional development is less about instructing teachers on what to do or how to improve. Instead, it focuses on “engaging them collaboratively in research and providing them with the tools to become professional decision makers who manage their own lifelong learning trajectory” (p. 3). A competent teacher is expected to thoughtfully analyse the strengths and weaknesses of their teaching and plan their professional development towards more successful teaching. They must be familiar with contemporary scientific findings relevant to their professional practice. However, they should also recognise that professional development can be achieved by following the latest research findings, reading research reports, participating in research projects, and conducting their own research to examine their teaching practice.

Recent reviews also suggest that although teacher professional learning is widely regarded as important, robust evidence linking it to student outcomes remains limited. In their systematic review, Ventista and Brown (2023) analysed 125 studies on teachers’ professional learning and development but found that only 11 used an experimental or quasi-experimental design to examine whether teachers’ professional development was associated with improvements in students’ learning outcomes. Their review indicates that training, ongoing coaching, and collaborative continuing professional development may be beneficial, particularly when support is sustained over time. However, they emphasise that evidence remains limited for several forms of professional development, highlighting the need for further research on how different approaches to teacher learning are organised and their effects.

2.2. Teacher Research

Although teachers are not expected to be scientists, they are expected to be reflective practitioners and researchers of their own practice, reflecting on their actions, questioning their effects, and making further decisions based on collected and analysed data. In this way, they can adapt to rapidly changing classroom tasks (Brew & Saunders, 2020), attend to their professional development, and improve the quality of their teaching.

The idea that teachers should systematically examine their own classroom practice found an important early expression in the Ford Project, launched in 1973 at the University of East Anglia, where much of the classroom research was conducted by teachers themselves through self-monitoring, case studies, and collaboration with a central research team (Bowen et al., 1975). Since then, the belief has increasingly strengthened that research and teaching are not dichotomous activities (Cole & Knowles, 2004), but are closely related (Michalak, 2010). Therefore, every teacher should be trained to monitor and critically evaluate new scientific knowledge and achievements in fields relevant to their professional activities, as well as to independently study, develop, and evaluate educational work (Podgornik, 2020). Researchers also use various terms to define teachers’ knowledge and activities in the research field, including research literacy, professional inquiry, teacher research, practitioner research, and research competence (Borg, 2006; Boyd et al., 2021; Kazancı Tınmaz & Sezgin, 2023; Kools et al., 2021; Matjašič & Vogrinc, 2024; Michalak, 2010). Although these concepts overlap in the literature, we do not treat them as synonymous. In the present study, research literacy refers primarily to the capacity to access, understand, discuss, critically evaluate, and use research in relation to educational practice, while also supporting research-informed professional judgement (Boyd et al., 2021; Kazancı Tınmaz & Sezgin, 2023). Teacher research is used more narrowly to denote teachers’ own systematic inquiry into educational practice or their own work (Borg, 2006). Professional inquiry is used here as a broader term for inquiry into practice oriented towards professional learning and improvement (Kools et al., 2021). Accordingly, for the purposes of this study, teacher research is treated as one possible form of professional inquiry, whereas research literacy is understood as a competence that supports engagement with both research use and practice-based inquiry. In contrast, research competence is understood more broadly as a multifaceted set of knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviours necessary for effective research practice (Matjašič & Vogrinc, 2024). In this sense, we view research literacy as one component of research competence.

Numerous benefits of teacher research have been identified in the literature (Berger et al., 2005; Borg, 2014; Michalak, 2010; Moore, 2007; Munthe & Rogne, 2015; Smith & Sela, 2005; Vogrinc & Valenčič Zuljan, 2009). For example, it develops autonomous teachers who can make rational, theory-based decisions and both consume and produce research. Teachers become more familiar with their students, their institution, and themselves as educators, leading to changes in teaching practice in line with research findings. As a result, teachers feel more competent, confident, motivated, autonomous, and knowledgeable. In collaborative teacher research, teachers have also reported improved relationships with colleagues. Teachers’ research is considered essential for developing professional capabilities by promoting evidence-based decision-making and ongoing professional development through engagement in research (Kuchumova & Mukhamejanova, 2025).

Recent literature has also examined how research-based teacher education can be organised to connect research more closely with professional practice. Antonsen et al. (2024) discuss how certain research approaches in master’s-level teacher education may bring pre-service teachers closer to practice and provide them with conceptual and practical tools for a thorough understanding of teaching. They differentiate between constative, critical, and constructive research approaches, and elaborate particularly on observations, interviews, action research, and lesson studies in relation to professional work. Furthermore, Rutten (2021) identifies process orientation, collaboration, reflection, dedicated time, and skilled facilitation as core features of practitioner inquiry in pre-service teacher education. The study reports outcomes such as pre-service teachers’ implementation of new instructional strategies, assessments, and technologies, while also noting that impacts on teaching practices and student outcomes remain underexplored.

Based on the literature, it can be argued that teacher research should be understood not only as an academic requirement but as a practice-related competence linked to reflection, professional inquiry, and the improvement of teaching. At the same time, previous research shows that the relationship between research preparation and professional practice is not self-evident and depends on how research is integrated into teacher education. Therefore, it is important to examine not only whether professional development and teacher research are formally represented in initial teacher education programmes, but also how these competences are perceived by pre-service and in-service teachers.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Context of the Study

This study was conducted as part of the national project Modernisation of pedagogical study programmes, co-financed by the Republic of Slovenia, the Ministry of Education, and the European Union—NextGenerationEU. The primary objective of the project is to integrate contemporary, future-oriented content into initial teacher education curricula and to develop a competence profile for pre-service teachers. Each faculty offering initial teacher education programmes is participating in this project.

In Slovenia, all teachers are required to complete a second-cycle study programme and obtain a master’s degree (300 ECTS). The initial teacher education programme must include at least 60 ECTS of core education courses, such as pedagogy, educational psychology, developmental psychology, philosophy of education, sociology of education, educational research, and didactics. A compulsory component of initial teacher education programmes is 15 ECTS of practical training. This practical training is organised in schools and takes place under the supervision of an experienced teacher mentor. In our research, we primarily focused on pre-service teachers, as they develop foundational orientations towards professional development and teacher research during initial teacher education. However, we also included in-service teachers, who serve as mentors during practical training and play a vital role in the professional development of pre-service teachers by providing guidance, feedback, and emotional support, all of which contribute significantly to the formation of professional identity (Izadinia, 2015; Zhang et al., 2025). For this reason, we consider the perceptions of in-service teachers regarding the importance of competences related to professional development and teacher research for effective teaching practice to be an essential reference point for understanding the alignment between initial teacher education and the realities of teaching practice.

There are 62 pedagogical study programmes offered at the University of Ljubljana: 18 at the first cycle and 44 at the second (master’s) cycle. These programmes are provided by eight members: the Academy of Music, the Faculty of Biotechnical Sciences, the Faculty of Arts, the Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Technology, the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, the Faculty of Sport, the Faculty of Education, and the Faculty of Theology.

Primary school teachers are educated at the Faculty of Education, while subject teachers are trained either at the Faculty of Education or at other faculties or academies. The Faculty of Education offers an integrated model of teacher training at both the bachelor’s and master’s levels, so that from the first year, students acquire both pedagogical and subject-specific content. At other faculties, pedagogical study programmes are available only at the master’s level.

3.2. Study Design and Data Collection

To address the research questions, we used a mixed-methods design, combining a document analysis of University of Ljubljana (UL) initial teacher education programmes (RQ1) with two web-based surveys administered to UL pre-service teachers and in-service teachers who mentored pre-service teachers during teaching practice (RQ2–RQ5).

For the document analysis, we conducted a structured content analysis of existing initial teacher education programme documents at the University of Ljubljana. Of the 62 programmes, 47 were randomly selected (75.8% of all initial teacher education programmes) and included in the analysis.

For the survey study, data were collected using the 1KA web survey platform (https://www.1ka.si/d/en, accessed on 27 September 2024) during the 2024/2025 academic year. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. At the beginning of each questionnaire, respondents were informed about the purpose of the study, the estimated completion time (approximately 10 min), and the anonymous use of data for research and programme development purposes. Two separate questionnaires were administered: (1) Pre-service teachers completed a questionnaire containing two key grid items: current perceived competence (“How competent are you currently?”) and required level of competence (“In your opinion, how competent should you be to perform high-quality teaching work?”); (2) in-service teachers were invited to complete a questionnaire assessing how competent pre-service teachers should be in a set of professional competences to perform high-quality teaching work.

3.3. Participants

A total of 443 pre-service teacher questionnaires were available for analysis. Of these, 303 respondents were enrolled in first-cycle (undergraduate) programmes and 140 in second-cycle (master’s) programmes. The distribution of pre-service teacher respondents by study level and year of study is presented in

Table 1. Distribution of pre-service teacher respondents by study level and year of study (N = 443).

Study Level	Year	n	%
1st cycle (undergraduate)	1	89	29.40
	2	100	33.00
	3	55	18.20
	4	59	19.50
2nd cycle (master’s)	1	128	91.40
	2	12	8.60

. Participants were enrolled at the University of Ljubljana across eight faculties, with the largest share from the Faculty of Education (n = 298, 67.3%) and the Faculty of Sport (n = 64, 14.4%), followed by the Faculty of Arts (n = 56, 12.6%). Smaller proportions were enrolled at the Biotechnical Faculty (n = 9, 2.0%), the Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Technology (n = 5, 1.1%), the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics (n = 5, 1.1%), the Faculty of Theology (n = 5, 1.1%), and the Academy of Music (n = 1, 0.2%).

At the Faculty of Education, the programme consists of four years at bachelor’s level and one year at master’s level. At all other faculties and the academy, it consists of three years at the bachelor’s level and two years at the master’s level. This is also why there are so few respondents enrolled in the second year of the master’s programme.

Additionally, 138 in-service teachers completed the questionnaire. The in-service teachers were predominantly female (88%, n = 121/138), with a mean age of 46.0 years (SD = 8.72, range 27–63, n = 138). Reported work experience averaged 20.6 years (SD = 9.46, range 4–40, n = 133). Most participants held a university degree or master’s-level qualification (88%).

3.4. Instrument

Both questionnaires were developed within the project context to support the construction of a competence profile for pre-service teachers. The instrument was designed to capture students’ self-assessments across a broad range of competences relevant for contemporary teacher education and future professional practice. The questionnaire included two parallel blocks of competency statements, perceived level of competence (“How competent are you currently”) and perceived required level of competence (“In your opinion, how competent should you be to perform high-quality teaching work”). Each block contained the same set of items, enabling direct comparison between perceived current competence and perceived required competence.

Responses were collected using a 5-point Likert scale (from “completely incompetent” to “very competent”). In addition to the competence items, the questionnaire collected basic study-related background information (faculty, study cycle/level, programme, and year of study), which enabled comparisons between year-of-study groups within initial teacher education.

For the purposes of the present analyses, particular attention was given to a theoretically defined domain related to professional development and teacher research. This domain consisted of eight items that address research-related professional activities (e.g., critical reflection on one’s work, using self-evaluation for quality improvement, monitoring research findings, participating in research projects, and researching one’s own practice) and professional development (e.g., responsibility for professional development, engagement in in-service training, and lifelong learning). These items were analysed at the item level and were additionally organised into two conceptual categories (teacher research-related competence and professional development-related competence).

Because the eight items were measured on 5-point ordinal scales, internal consistency was estimated using polychoric-based ordinal reliability coefficients. The 8-item subdomain showed high reliability (ordinal α = 0.93; McDonald’s ω = 0.93).

To evaluate whether the selected eight items are related to continuous professional development and teacher research, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on a polychoric correlation matrix. Before the EFA, we checked the data’s suitability for factor analysis. Sampling adequacy was high (overall KMO = 0.90), and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was statistically significant (χ²(28) = 2250.11, p < 0.001), indicating that the correlation matrix was appropriate for factor extraction. Parallel analysis suggested two factors, which were further examined. In the one-factor solution (minimum residual extraction, oblimin rotation), all items loaded strongly on a common factor (loadings approximately 0.69 to 0.86), and the factor accounted for a substantial proportion of variance (62.8%). A two-factor solution showed an interpretable split broadly aligned with the conceptual distinction between research-related items and professional development items; however, the two factors were very strongly correlated (r = 0.89). This indicates that the two domains are closely related components of a broader competence dimension. Based on this pattern, the study report’s results are primarily at the item level while retaining the conceptual grouping of items (teacher research and professional development) to align with the study’s conceptual framework and research questions.

3.5. Data Analysis

For the content analysis, 12 broader content areas or categories were defined, with subcategories specified in some cases. The categories were: professional development; research; teaching (including assessment, gifted students, individualisation, differentiation); promoting the European way of life (including interculturality and multilingualism, reducing inequality, gender equality); digital literacy (including artificial intelligence); European Green Deal (including environmental awareness, climate change); economy for the people (including social justice, poverty eradication); discipline; sustainable development; social responsibility (including innovation, responsible consumption, collaboration and partnership); democracy (including human rights, critical thinking); and health and well-being (including development of social and emotional competences). The curricula of each study programme were analysed independently by two researchers using a predefined coding scheme, and their findings were subsequently compared. Any discrepancies were discussed until consensus was reached.

Statistical analyses were conducted using the R version 4.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). Data management and analysis primarily relied on the following packages: haven (version 2.5.5), dplyr (version 1.1.4), tidyr (version 1.3.1), tidyverse (version 2.0.0), purr (version 1.1.0), janitor (version 2.2.1), scales (version 1.3.0), rstatix (version 0.7.3) and FSA (version 0.10.0).

Analyses were performed item-wise, using all available responses per item (pairwise deletion). As the outcomes were ordinal and inspection of Shapiro–Wilk tests and Q–Q plots indicated deviations from normality, we used non-parametric tests: the Mann–Whitney U test for two-group comparisons and the Kruskal–Wallis test for comparisons across more than two groups, followed by Dunn’s post hoc tests. Effect sizes were reported alongside p-values (i.e., Cliff’s delta (δ) for Mann–Whitney and epsilon-squared (ε²) for Kruskal–Wallis).

Descriptive statistics were reported as n and median (IQR) as the primary summary, with mean (SD) provided as an additional descriptive indicator. For inferential analyses, a two-sided significance level of α = 0.05 was used. When multiple tests were conducted across several items within the same research question, Holm’s correction was applied to control the family-wise error rate.

4. Results

4.1. Content Areas and Competence Integration (RQ1)

To answer RQ1, we analysed 47 randomly selected initial teacher education programmes at the University of Ljubljana, representing 75.8% of all such programmes. For the content analysis, 12 broader content areas or categories were defined (

Table 2. Presence of content areas in programme goals and/or competence statements across analysed initial teacher education programmes at the University of Ljubljana.

Content Area	Goals		Competence		Goals or Competence
	n	%	n	%	n	%
Professional development	40	85.1	44	93.6	44	93.6
Research	28	59.6	46	97.9	46	97.9
Teaching (including assessment, gifted students, individualisation, differentiation)	37	78.7	42	89.4	43	91.5
Digital literacy (including artificial intelligence)	18	38.3	36	76.6	37	78.7
Discipline	22	46.8	33	70.2	33	70.2
Sustainable development	20	42.6	37	78.7	37	78.7
European Green Deal (including environmental awareness, climate change)	6	12.8	16	34.0	16	34.0
Promoting the European way of life (including interculturality, multilingualism, reducing inequality, gender equality)	32	68.1	42	89.4	42	89.4
Economy for the people (including social justice, poverty eradication)	22	46.8	23	48.9	24	51.1
Social responsibility (including innovation, responsible consumption, collaboration, partnership)	23	48.9	37	78.7	38	80.9
Democracy (including human rights, critical thinking)	32	68.1	36	76.6	37	78.7
Health and well-being (including development of social and emotional competences)	13	27.7	28	59.6	31	66.0

). We analysed whether these categories appear at the level of goals or competences.

The data in Table 2 show how many individual initial teacher education programmes address specific categories in goals, competences, or at least in one of these elements. Content areas are considered present if they appear at least once in the goals or competences of the programme.

The analysis of initial teacher education programmes reveals substantial variation in the extent to which individual thematic categories are represented at the level of goals or competences. The most represented categories are research (only one programme does not include this category); professional development (only three programmes do not include this category); teaching, which encompasses knowledge assessment, didactics, gifted education, and individualisation (91.5% of programmes); and promoting the European way of life, which includes foreign language skills, interculturality, gender equality, and reducing inequality (89.4% of programmes). The least represented categories are the European Green Deal, which addresses environmental awareness and climate change and is included in approximately one-third of the analysed programmes, and health and well-being, which includes the development of social and emotional competences and is included in around two-thirds of the analysed programmes.

When examining the presence of these categories exclusively at the competence level in initial teacher education programmes, the same pattern emerges. The most represented category remains research, included in 97.9% of programmes. This is followed by professional development, represented in 93.6% of programmes, and by teaching and promoting the European way of life, both of which are included in 89.4% of programmes. The least represented categories in the list of competences are, once again, the European Green Deal (included in about one third of programmes) and economy for the people, represented in slightly less than half of the programmes.

At the level of goals, the most frequently represented categories are professional development (85.1% of programmes), followed by teaching (78.7% of programmes), promoting the European way of life (68.1% of programmes), and democracy, which includes human rights and critical thinking (68.1% of programmes). Research is in fifth position, represented in 59.6% of programmes. The least represented categories at the level of goals are the European Green Deal (12.8% of programmes) and health and well-being (27.7% of programmes).

4.2. Pre-Service Teachers’ Perceived Competence in Professional Development and Research (RQ2)

To address RQ2, we summarised pre-service teachers’ perceived competence to pursue professional development and teacher research using descriptive statistics. Given the ordinal (Likert-type) response format, we report the median (IQR) as the primary indicator and provide the mean and standard deviation (SD) as additional descriptive summaries (

Table 3. Descriptive statistics for pre-service teachers’ perceived competence in professional development, teacher research, and teaching.

Item	Domain	n	M (SD)	Mdn (IQR)
Knowledge of the subject-specific content area	Teaching	431	4.42 (0.83)	5 (1)
Establishing rules of behaviour to ensure classroom discipline	Teaching	425	4.42 (0.80)	5 (1)
Knowledge of subject-specific didactics (how to teach the subject content)	Teaching	428	4.40 (0.89)	5 (1)
Assessment of student knowledge (monitoring and evaluating students’ progress in line with learning objectives and providing constructive feedback)	Teaching	422	4.28 (0.91)	5 (1)
Competence to self-critically reflect on one’s own work and evaluate it	Teacher research	437	3.57 (0.89)	4 (1)
Improving the quality of one’s work based on self-evaluation in the quality assurance process	Teacher research	427	3.38 (0.90)	3 (1)
Monitoring the results of research in the pedagogical field	Teacher research	427	2.85 (0.91)	3 (1)
Competence to participate constructively in research projects	Teacher research	408	2.95 (0.92)	3 (2)
Competence to research one’s own practice	Teacher research	411	3.21 (0.88)	3 (1)
Responsibility for one’s professional development	Professional development	432	3.57 (0.90)	4 (1)
Improving the quality of one’s work through in-service training	Professional development	427	3.39 (0.89)	3 (1)
Ability to engage in lifelong learning	Professional development	425	3.30 (0.88)	3 (1)

Note: M = mean; SD = standard deviation; Mdn = median; IQR = interquartile range.

).

Although RQ2 focuses on professional development and teacher research, Table 3 also reports four teaching-related competences (content knowledge, didactics, classroom management, and assessment), which received the highest ratings among all competences. This indicates that pre-service teachers perceive themselves as particularly well prepared in core teaching domains. By presenting teaching competences alongside professional development and research-related competences, we provide a reference point that enables a clearer interpretation of the ratings for research and professional development.

Table 3 shows that pre-service teachers reported very high perceived competence in teaching domains (Mdn = 5 across the four teaching items). However, ratings for teacher research and professional development items were notably lower. The overall mean values for the three competence domains show a similar pattern: pre-service teachers rate their teaching competence highest (overall M = 4.38), whereas competence in continuous professional development (overall M = 3.42) is substantially lower than in teaching, but slightly higher than in teacher research (overall M = 3.20). The item with the lowest average score in the teaching domain (assessment of student knowledge; M = 4.28) is still rated much higher than the items with the highest average scores in the teacher research and professional development domains (M = 3.57).

In the professional development domain, pre-service teachers reported the highest perceived competence in responsibility for one’s own professional development (M = 3.57; Mdn = 4, IQR = 1). Ratings were moderate for in-service training (M = 3.39; Mdn = 3, IQR = 1) and for the competence to engage in lifelong learning (M = 3.30; Mdn = 3, IQR = 1).

In the teacher research domain, pre-service teachers reported the highest perceived competence in self-critical reflection on their own work (M = 3.57; Mdn = 4, IQR = 1). Ratings were moderate for improving the quality of their work based on self-evaluation in the quality assurance process (M = 3.38; Mdn = 3, IQR = 1) and for researching their own practice (M = 3.21; Mdn = 3, IQR = 1). Pre-service teachers rated their competence to participate in research projects (M = 2.95; Mdn = 3, IQR = 2) and to monitor research findings in the pedagogical field (M = 2.85; Mdn = 3, IQR = 1) below the mean value of 3.00.

4.3. Differences Between Perceived Current and Perceived Required Competence (RQ3)

Furthermore, we examined differences between pre-service teachers’ ratings of their current perceived competence and the level of competence they perceive as necessary for high-quality teaching in professional development and teacher research. Paired comparisons were conducted using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Mean ranks, rank-biserial correlations (r_rb), and Holm-adjusted p-values are reported for each item (

Table 4. Paired comparisons of pre-service teachers’ ratings of current perceived competence versus necessary competence for high-quality teaching in professional development and research (Wilcoxon signed-rank tests).

Item	Domain	n	Current Competence Mean Rank	Required Competence Mean Rank	rrb	p
Competence to self-critically reflect on one’s own work and evaluate it	Teacher research	416	316.47	516.53	0.784	<0.001
Improving the quality of one’s work based on self-evaluation in the quality assurance process	Teacher research	407	298.91	516.09	0.840	<0.001
Monitoring the results of research in the pedagogical field	Teacher research	409	280.69	538.31	0.928	<0.001
Competence to participate constructively in research projects	Teacher research	392	281.43	503.57	0.880	<0.001
Competence to research one’s own practice	Teacher research	390	279.94	501.06	0.886	<0.001
Responsibility for one’s professional development	Professional development	412	316.83	508.17	0.782	<0.001
Improving the quality of one’s work through in-service training	Professional development	411	303.87	519.13	0.828	<0.001
Competence to engage in lifelong learning	Professional development	406	291.96	521.04	0.871	<0.001

).

Table 4 shows statistically significant differences between pre-service teachers’ perceived competence and the competence level they believe is necessary (i.e., required competence) for high-quality teaching across all professional development and teacher research items. For every item, ratings of required competence were higher than ratings of current competence (all p < 0.001), indicating a perceived gap between current and required competence levels. Furthermore, the rank-biserial correlations (r_rb = 0.78–0.93) indicate large effect sizes, meaning that the differences are not only statistically significant but also substantial in magnitude. The largest gaps are concentrated in the teacher research domain, especially for the item “Monitoring the results of research in the pedagogical field” (r_rb = 0.928), “Competence to participate constructively in research projects” (r_rb = 0.880), and “Competence to research one’s own practice” (r_rb = 0.886). In the professional development domain, the largest gap is concentrated in competence to engage in lifelong learning (r_rb = 0.871).

4.4. Stage-Based Differences in Pre-Service Teachers’ Perceived Current and Required Competence for Professional Development and Teacher Research (RQ4)

To address RQ4, we examined whether pre-service teachers at different stages of their initial teacher education (years 1–2, years 3–4, and master’s level) differed in their perceived competence for sustaining professional development and teacher research. Stage-based group differences were tested separately for current competence (

Table 5. Stage-based differences in pre-service teachers’ perceived current competence in sustaining professional development and teacher research.

Item	Category	Years 1–2	Years 3–4	Master’s Level	H(2)	ε2	p	Dunn Post Hoc
		Mean Rank (n)
Competence to self-critically reflect on one’s own work and evaluate it	Teacher research	178.75 (186)	251.81 (112)	246.42 (139)	37.01	0.081	<0.001	Years 3–4 > Years 1–2; Master’s > Years 1–2
Improving the quality of one’s work based on self-evaluation in the quality assurance process	Teacher research	179.49 (179)	229.23 (113)	247.01 (135)	28.50	0.062	<0.001	Years 3–4 > Years 1–2; Master’s > Years 1–2
Monitoring research findings in the pedagogical field	Teacher research	179.54 (184)	244.68 (108)	236.43 (135)	28.67	0.063	<0.001	Years 3–4 > Years 1–2; Master’s > Years 1–2
Competence to participate constructively in research projects	Teacher research	180.89 (175)	214.03 (104)	228.84 (129)	14.72	0.031	<0.001	Years 3–4 > Years 1–2; Master’s > Years 1–2
Competence to research one’s own practice	Teacher research	175.93 (178)	237.00 (108)	222.04 (125)	23.76	0.053	<0.001	Years 3–4 > Years 1–2; Master’s > Years 1–2
Responsibility for one’s professional development	Professional development	182.83 (183)	230.84 (111)	249.61 (138)	27.33	0.059	<0.001	Years 3–4 > Years 1–2; Master’s > Years 1–2
Continuing education and training	Professional development	189.95 (180)	216.92 (112)	243.65 (135)	16.66	0.035	<0.001	Master’s > Years 1–2
Competence to engage in lifelong learning	Professional development	187.07 (182)	228.94 (112)	235.40 (131)	16.45	0.034	<0.001	Years 3–4 > Years 1–2; Master’s > Years 1–2

) and required competence level (

Table 6. Stage-based differences in pre-service teachers’ views on the required level of competence in sustaining professional development and teacher research.

Item	Category	Years 1–2	Years 3–4	Master’s Level	H(2)	ε2	p	Dunn Post Hoc
		Mean Rank (n)
Competence to self-critically reflect on one’s own work and evaluate it	Teacher research	197.67 (177)	210.56 (108)	230.11 (137)	6.98	0.012	0.122	Not significant
Improving the quality of one’s work based on self-evaluation in the quality assurance process	Teacher research	194.02 (176)	214.17 (107)	228.80 (137)	7.88	0.014	0.097	Not significant
Monitoring research findings in the pedagogical field	Teacher research	192.78 (177)	219.50 (108)	229.38 (137)	8.56	0.016	0.083	Not significant
Competence to participate constructively in research projects	Teacher research	197.84 (176)	209.98 (108)	227.29 (136)	5.09	0.007	0.235	Not significant
Competence to research one’s own practice	Teacher research	198.92 (176)	213.10 (107)	218.97 (134)	2.66	0.002	0.369	Not significant
Responsibility for one’s professional development	Professional development	192.57 (178)	215.52 (108)	234.47 (137)	11.28	0.022	0.025	Master’s > Years 1–2
Continuing education and training	Professional development	192.51 (179)	214.37 (108)	235.77 (136)	11.61	0.023	0.024	Master’s > Years 1–2
Competence to engage in lifelong learning	Professional development	200.01 (178)	214.39 (108)	222.79 (135)	3.38	0.003	0.369	Not significant

) using Kruskal–Wallis tests with Holm-adjusted p values, followed by Dunn post hoc comparisons (Holm correction) where appropriate.

Across stages of initial teacher education, statistically significant differences were found for all items related to sustaining professional development and teacher research (Holm-adjusted p < 0.001 for all items). Across all items in the professional development domain, master’s-level pre-service teachers reported the highest perceived current competence, while years 1–2 pre-service teachers reported the lowest. Master’s level pre-service teachers demonstrated significantly higher perceived current competence than those in years 1–2. Additionally, years 3–4 pre-service teachers reported significantly higher perceived competence in responsibility for their professional development and engaging in lifelong learning than those in years 1–2.

In the teacher research domain, master’s-level pre-service teachers reported the highest perceived competence in improving the quality of their work through self-evaluation within the quality assurance process and in participating in research projects. In contrast, years 3–4 pre-service teachers reported the highest perceived competence in self-critical reflection, monitoring research findings in the pedagogical field, and researching their own practice. Years 1–2 pre-service teachers reported the lowest perceived competence across all items. Post hoc Dunn–Holm comparisons indicated statistically significant differences for all items in the teacher research domain between master’s and years 1–2 pre-service teachers, and between years 3–4 and years 1–2 pre-service teachers.

The data indicate (Table 6) that pre-service teachers’ perceptions of the importance of competences increase with years of study. Master’s level pre-service teachers rated all listed competences in the professional development and teacher research domains as most important, whereas years 1–2 pre-service teachers rated them as least important. However, stage-based differences in the perceived required level of competence were limited. Only two items in the professional development domain—responsibility for professional development and continuing education and training—showed statistically significant differences after Holm correction (p = 0.025 and p = 0.024, respectively). Post hoc tests showed that master’s level pre-service teachers rated the required competence levels higher than years 1–2 pre-service teachers. No statistically significant differences were found for items in the teacher research domain across years of study.

4.5. Differences in the Perceived Importance of Competences Between Pre-Service and In-Service Teachers (RQ5)

To address RQ5, we compared in-service and pre-service teachers regarding their perceptions of the competence level required for high-quality teaching in the domains of professional development and teacher research. As responses were collected on 5-point ordinal scales, we tested group differences for each item using the Mann–Whitney U test, applying the Holm adjustment across items within this research question (

Table 7. In-service and pre-service teachers’ ratings of required competence levels in professional development and teacher research.

		Pre-Service Teachers		In-Service Teachers
Item	Domain	n	Mean Rank	n	Mean Rank	Delta δ	p
Competence to self-critically reflect on one’s own work and evaluate it	Teacher research	422	283.21	138	272.22	0.039	1.000
Improving the quality of one’s work based on self-evaluation in the quality assurance process	Teacher research	420	284.34	137	262.64	0.078	0.534
Monitoring the results of research in the pedagogical field	Teacher research	422	288.38	129	235.52	0.192	0.004
Competence to participate constructively in research projects	Teacher research	420	285.54	130	243.06	0.154	0.035
Competence to research one’s own practice	Teacher research	417	283.06	130	244.94	0.139	0.059
Responsibility for one’s professional development	Professional development	423	282.26	138	277.12	0.018	1.000
Improving the quality of one’s work through in-service training	Professional development	423	282.76	136	271.43	0.041	1.000
Competence to engage in lifelong learning	Professional development	421	285.70	135	256.05	0.107	0.212

Note: Positive δ indicates higher ratings among pre-service teachers.

).

Results (Table 7) indicated that pre-service teachers generally rated items in the teacher research and professional development domains as more important than in-service teachers. However, after Holm correction, no statistically significant differences were found in perceived required competence for any professional development items (all p ≥ 0.212, δ ≤ 0.107). In contrast, pre-service teachers rated research-related competences significantly higher than in-service teachers regarding monitoring the results of research in the pedagogical field (p = 0.004, δ = 0.192) and participation in research projects (p = 0.035, δ = 0.154). No statistically significant differences were found for the remaining teacher research-related items (self-critical reflection on one’s own work, improving the quality of one’s work based on self-evaluation within the quality assurance process, and researching one’s own practice).

5. Discussion

This study reveals a discrepancy between how initial teacher education programmes incorporate two foundational competences: continuous professional development and teacher research, and how these competences are perceived by pre-service and in-service teachers. Although professional development and teacher research are widely included in programme documentation, pre-service teachers do not feel as well prepared in these areas as they do in core teaching competences.

The document analysis (RQ1) suggests that the issue is not whether these competences are formally included, but how they are positioned in the curriculum. Teaching appears to be framed more clearly as a central, practice-linked part of pre-service teacher preparation, whereas professional development, and especially research, are more often embedded in ways less directly connected to practice.

A more detailed content analysis of the analysed pedagogical study programmes at the University of Ljubljana helps explain this pattern. Analysed programmes include several compulsory courses addressing different dimensions of teaching (e.g., teaching strategies, assessment, differentiation, and individualisation). Typically, Didactics and Subject-Specific Didactics are included in various years of both bachelor’s and master’s programmes. However, no study programme includes an independent compulsory course dedicated to teachers’ professional development. Instead, topics related to teachers’ professional development are included in other courses, such as Didactics, Pedagogy, Andragogy, and Theory of Education. Research-related courses are positioned differently across programmes. Some do not include a dedicated research course in their curriculum. At the Faculty of Education, a compulsory research-related course is included in all bachelor’s (e.g., Pedagogical Methodology) and master’s programmes (e.g., Methodology of Scientific Research). At the Faculty of Arts, the course Researching the Learning Process is offered as an elective on all programmes.

Based on the document analysis, it can be concluded that teaching competences are commonly supported through repeated coursework and practicum-related activities, whereas professional development is more often dispersed across courses without a distinct curricular anchor. Research is commonly present in the form of methodology instruction or thesis preparation, but less clearly framed as a practical tool for evaluating and improving teaching. As a result, pre-service teachers may encounter research as an academic requirement rather than as a routine component of professional practice.

Turning to pre-service teachers’ self-assessments (RQ2), the results show that formal curricular presence does not automatically translate into a strong sense of preparedness. Pre-service teachers appear confident in core teaching domains, but substantially less so in competences related to professional development and teacher research, indicating that these domains are not yet experienced as equally developed, visible, or actionable within initial teacher education, even when they are formally represented in programme documentation. These findings are consistent with previous research (Balyer, 2017; Ismail & Jarrah, 2019; Yüksel, 2014), showing that pre-service teachers tend to report strong self-confidence in their teaching competence, particularly in subject knowledge, understanding of teaching and learning processes, engaging students in learning, and their ability to select, implement, and adapt appropriate teaching strategies. These findings suggest that competences related to teacher research need to be systematically developed across the programme and more clearly linked to teaching practice. Research does not become meaningful simply because it is formally included in course descriptions. Rather, pre-service teachers need repeated opportunities to use inquiry as part of reflection, practicum, and teaching improvement. Previous research supports this interpretation, showing that pre-service teachers often struggle to connect research with authentic pedagogical problems and benefit most when research is embedded in inquiry-oriented and practice-relevant tasks (Gümüşok et al., 2024; Munthe & Rogne, 2015; Visser-Wijnveen et al., 2016). Research conducted in the Kosovo context shows that the development of technical research skills typically remains the only component of the broader teacher-researcher development. This narrow approach stems from a history of isolating research in a single methods course, emphasising transmission of research content knowledge with pre-service teachers primarily in a passive audience role, focusing on theoretical research skills, and perceiving thesis projects as a formal requirement rather than a meaningful learning experience (Kaçaniku, 2020). At the same time, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Our document analysis captured whether professional development and teacher research were formally represented in programme goals and competence statements, but it could not determine the depth, pedagogical quality, or practical enactment of this content within courses. The presence of a topic in programme documentation, therefore, does not necessarily indicate that it is taught systematically, linked to practicum, or experienced by pre-service teachers as a meaningful part of their preparation. This limitation is important for interpreting the observed mismatch between curricular representation and perceived preparedness.

The current required competence gap (RQ3) strengthens this interpretation. Pre-service teachers did not merely report lower current competence in these domains; they also perceived them as areas where the distance between their current level and the level required for high-quality teaching is substantial. The largest gaps were observed in research engagement items, suggesting that active use of research is not fully incorporated into teacher identity during initial preparation. An alternative explanation, however, is that research-related items may have been perceived as more abstract or demanding than teaching-related items. Because pre-service teachers are likely to have more direct experience with teaching tasks than with research participation, lower self-ratings in this domain may partly reflect differences in familiarity and curricular integration. These findings are consistent with those of Gümüşok et al. (2024), who reported that pre-service teachers evaluated their overall research competence positively. They also note that research is often perceived as an academically oriented activity rather than an integral part of teaching practice. Furthermore, Slovenian research on pre-service teachers’ perceived research competence by Matjašič and Vogrinc (2025a) found that master’s students strongly value research, while reporting lower confidence in statistical procedures (e.g., SPSS), evaluating the validity and reliability of instruments, and conducting action research. On this basis, they emphasise the need for more hands-on research experiences and stronger support structures to enhance students’ engagement and confidence. A similar pattern is evident in our results, particularly in the largest gaps observed for research engagement items.

Previous work on research-based teacher education and research–teaching integration suggests that making research meaningful for students depends on how consistently research is connected to coursework, practicum experiences, and professional decision-making, and that students’ perceived research integration can vary across learning environments (Munthe & Rogne, 2015). Recent research also indicates that pre-service teachers perceive varying degrees of research integration at the programme level, with some aspects (e.g., exposure to faculty research) more consistently experienced than others (e.g., opportunities for active research participation, such as conducting research with peers or writing articles) (Matjašič & Vogrinc, 2025b). Accordingly, one plausible explanation for our results is that pre-service teachers may encounter research primarily as a curricular requirement (e.g., methods courses and thesis work) without yet experiencing research use and inquiry as a routine part of day-to-day professional learning and teaching improvement. This interpretation also helps explain why professional development items were rated “between” teaching and teacher research. Professional development is often organised through relatively formal forms (e.g., structured learning opportunities, feedback, and reflection cycles), whereas stronger research engagement presupposes research literacy, including the capacity to locate, interpret, and critically appraise research and use it to inform practice (Kazancı Tınmaz & Sezgin, 2023). It also typically requires more explicit opportunities for guided participation in inquiry-oriented activities across coursework and practicum (Munthe & Rogne, 2015; Visser-Wijnveen et al., 2016). Participants in the Turkish study (Gümüşok et al., 2024) emphasised the need to increase research engagement across the curriculum, particularly through inquiry-based approaches and action research. They argued that research engagement should be treated as a prerequisite for successful professional development.

Although our findings show the overall pattern of perceived competence and the current–required discrepancy, we also examined whether these perceptions vary across different stages of initial teacher education (RQ4). Our results indicate that statistically significant differences in perceived competence related to professional development and teacher research also emerged across stages of initial teacher education (years 1–2, years 3–4, and master’s level). Master’s pre-service teachers assigned the highest importance ratings to all listed competences in the professional development and teacher research domains, whereas years 1–2 pre-service teachers assigned the lowest. Nevertheless, stage-based differences were statistically significant only for two items in the professional development domain: responsibility for professional development and continuing education and training. No statistically significant differences were found for teacher research items across years of study. Fitzsimons et al. (2025) found that pre-service teachers demonstrated overall professional development during their initial teacher education, with a statistically significant improvement in placement performance from the third to the fourth year. The greatest progress was seen in professionalism, communication, classroom and lesson management, and inclusive practice, suggesting that increased experience strengthens professional identity and awareness of teachers’ roles and responsibilities. Although pre-service teachers cannot acquire all the competences needed for successful teaching practice during their initial teacher education, this initial education remains important for a successful entry into the teaching profession and for later professional development. As Hatlevik (2017) noted, the level of perceived competence acquired during initial teacher training is crucial to perceived mastery of teaching as a schoolteacher. However, it is important that the courses are systematically included in the study programme and that their content is logically connected and developed throughout the programme. Pre-service teachers must have the opportunity to connect the content in an interdisciplinary manner and, above all, to see how the theoretical content discussed within individual courses can be meaningfully applied in teaching practice.

Comparisons between pre-service and in-service teachers (RQ5) showed broad similarity in perceptions of required competence, with statistically significant differences only for two research-related items. This suggests that the two groups do not fundamentally disagree about the importance of professional development and teacher research for high-quality teaching. One plausible explanation for the few observed differences is that they approach these competences from different professional standpoints: pre-service teachers may endorse a more idealised image of the research-informed teacher, whereas in-service teachers may evaluate these items more in light of everyday school constraints. Even so, the overall alignment is important because it indicates that the main challenge may lie less in disagreement about the value of these competences and more in how they are translated into meaningful learning opportunities within initial teacher education and practicum.

While these findings arise from a single institutional context, they are likely to have relevance beyond the University of Ljubljana. In many institutions, professional development and research are formally recognised as important teacher competences, yet their practical integration into coursework and school-based learning may remain uneven. The contribution of the present study is therefore not to claim that the same empirical pattern will occur in all contexts, but to highlight a potentially broader issue: formal curricular inclusion does not by itself ensure that pre-service teachers experience these competences as practice-relevant and well developed. Comparative studies across institutions are needed to examine how different programme structures support or constrain this integration.

6. Conclusions

This study reveals a misalignment between what initial teacher education programmes represent and what pre-service teachers perceive themselves as capable of doing. Although research and professional development are more strongly represented at the level of stated goals and competences in initial teacher education programmes than teaching, pre-service teachers reported higher perceived competence in the teaching domain compared to the professional development domain and the teacher research domain. The results show statistically significant differences between pre-service teachers’ perceived and required competence levels in all professional development and teacher research items, with required competence consistently rated higher.

Curriculum analysis reveals differences in the teaching methods and approaches used to develop these three sets of competences. Competences related to professional development and teacher research are mainly included in curricula as the acquisition of theoretical knowledge and are often treated as academic requirements rather than as practice-embedded professional capabilities. For example, pre-service teachers learn about different levels of teacher professional development, key theoretical frameworks and researchers in the field, and strategies for promoting professional development. In the area of teacher research, they acquire theoretical knowledge of quantitative and qualitative research methods, descriptive and inferential statistical procedures, and the stages of the research process. In contrast, teaching competences are much more closely linked to practice. Pre-service teachers apply teaching methods as well as principles of differentiation and individualisation when planning lessons and then implement these plans in classroom settings. Courses primarily designed to develop teaching competences, such as Didactics and Subject Didactics, already incorporate practical training components.

Based on these findings, several practical implications can be identified. Future programme development should aim to integrate teacher research and professional development competences more closely with practice, enabling pre-service teachers to apply theoretical knowledge directly within pedagogical contexts during their studies. When developing competences related to teacher research, it is insufficient to focus solely on conducting research for academic purposes (e.g., conducting empirical research for seminar papers or a master’s thesis). Greater emphasis should be placed on using research as a tool for quality assurance, for self-evaluation of pedagogical work, to address specific educational challenges, and to support teachers’ continuous professional development. Pre-service teachers should have the opportunity to conduct action research, which typically arises from concrete problems in practice and involves implementing specific changes and evaluating their effects. To make research meaningful, interdisciplinary cooperation is recommended, connecting the obligations that pre-service teachers have across different courses (for example, planning and conducting empirical research as part of another course). To further support the development of professional competence, it would be beneficial to consider a dedicated course in which pre-service teachers systematically acquire knowledge in this area. Within such a course, pre-service teachers could have concrete tasks aimed at managing and reflecting on their professional development throughout their studies. From the first year of study, pre-service teachers could develop a professional portfolio that included analyses of lesson observations, reflections on teaching practice, and plans for their personal professional development.

It would be beneficial to involve in-service teachers, particularly those working in schools where pre-service teachers complete their teaching practice, in the development of teacher research and professional development competences. Although our study found no statistically significant differences between pre-service and in-service teachers in perceived required competence for professional development items and for most teacher research items, pre-service teachers rated certain research-related competences significantly higher, specifically in relation to monitoring research findings in the pedagogical field and participating in research projects. Nevertheless, in-service teachers can make an important contribution to the development of these competences in pre-service teachers, particularly through their practical experience in making research work meaningful for teaching practice, interpreting research findings, connecting them to quality assurance and improvements in teaching practice, and using teacher research as a tool for their own professional development.

7. Limitations and Future Research

This study has several limitations, which also indicate directions for future research. First, the quantitative findings are based on self-reported perceptions of competence (both current and required), which may differ from observed competence in authentic teaching and research-related tasks. The findings should be interpreted as perceived preparedness rather than actual demonstrated competence. Responses may also be influenced by social desirability, self-confidence, or respondents’ interpretations of the competence statements, particularly for research-related items, which may be less familiar in the early stages of initial teacher education. Second, the study used a cross-sectional design. Although we compared groups at different stages of initial teacher education, these stage-based differences should not be interpreted as reflecting individual developmental trajectories. Longitudinal research would be needed to determine whether these differences reflect actual developmental change during programme participation. Third, the surveys were conducted within a single institutional context (University of Ljubljana), and participation was voluntary, which may introduce selection and nonresponse bias. Although the University of Ljubljana is the largest university in Slovenia and educates the highest number of pre-service teachers, the findings should not be generalised to all initial teacher education programmes in Slovenia or to other national contexts without caution, as programme structures, practicum arrangements, and curriculum may differ across institutions. Fourth, the sample of pre-service teachers does not represent all pre-service teachers at the University of Ljubljana. Although the Faculty of Education enrols the largest number of pre-service teachers at the University of Ljubljana, which is reflected in our sample, pre-service teachers from the Faculty of Arts and the Academy of Music are slightly underrepresented. It should be noted that courses and teaching practice are organised differently across faculties. The sample of in-service teachers is also not representative, and we did not analyse it in more detail (e.g., frequency of mentoring, subjects taught, completed study programme, etc.). Fifth, the analysis of pedagogical study programmes is based on the competences and goals outlined in the curricula rather than on a detailed examination of individual course syllabi. A more in-depth analysis of syllabi was conducted only for courses that explicitly included professional development and teacher research among their stated goals and competences; these findings are presented in the discussion.