The modern globalized educational context continuously presents challenges and imperatives that unfold both locally and internationally, reshaping teachers' professional roles and responsibilities (Hargreaves, 2000; Swann et al., 2010; Evans, 2011). These evolving professional demands create new conditions for the teaching profession, leading to the formation of diverse teacher subjectivities. Teachers' professional subjectivity is shaped by the ongoing interplay between their personal and professional experiences as they navigate a complex and constantly changing educational landscape (Parmigiani et al., 2023).

An important aspect of subjectivity is teachers' professionalism, which is explored in international literature as a multifaceted and dynamic construct, with autonomy playing a critical role. Autonomy is often understood as the degree of control teachers have over their classroom practices (Esland, 1980; Furlong, 2001; Day, 2002) and is closely linked to professionalism (Barton et al., 1994; Helsby, 1995; Hargreaves, 2000; Webb et al., 2004). This connection highlights autonomy as both a defining characteristic of professionalism and a central factor in shaping teachers' professional subjectivity. As teachers assume new roles and responsibilities influenced by local and international policies, the notion of autonomy becomes increasingly complex. Teachers find themselves negotiating between their desire for professional independence and the external demands imposed upon them. These pressures create a dynamic tension, with professionalism continuously evolving as teachers engage with and respond to external control (Helsby, 1995). Within this context, teachers must navigate their autonomy while aligning their practices with the evolving demands of the educational environment.

This study examines the Erasmus program as an educational policy that significantly influences teachers' professional subjectivity, impacting both their professionalism and autonomy. While the program offers opportunities for professional growth, it also situates teachers within a broader policy-driven framework. Teachers participating in Erasmus must balance their aspirations for autonomy with the institutional and political objectives embedded in the program. Although Erasmus encourages self-directed professional development, it simultaneously introduces expectations and regulations that both challenge and support teachers' autonomy, requiring them to negotiate their professional subjectivity within its structure.

However, teachers are not passive recipients of policy directives. Their active participation contributes to the ongoing evolution of the Erasmus program, highlighting the dynamic relationship between teachers and policy. This interaction underscores the importance of understanding how teachers, as active agents, shape and influence the policies that govern their professional lives. The intersection of Erasmus with local educational policies creates a complex environment in which teachers must continuously negotiate their autonomy. Their experiences are shaped by local factors, including their personal lives, schools, and institutional structures, as well as broader social and political forces within Cyprus and beyond. Teachers must navigate these pressures, asserting their autonomy while constructing their professional identities in an ever-changing educational landscape.

Accordingly, this paper investigates, through teachers' life histories, how they construct themselves as "Erasmus subjects"—professionals who integrate their personal and professional lives through engagement with the program. The focus is on the challenges teachers face in negotiating their autonomy within the context of the Erasmus program, particularly within the Cypriot educational framework. By exploring how teachers navigate the tensions between external policy demands and their professional aspirations, this research seeks to contribute to a deeper understanding of the impact of international mobility programs on teachers' professional subjectivity and the policies that shape their practice. Ultimately, the paper aims to shed light on how teachers, as active agents, negotiate and assert their autonomy within a dynamic educational landscape, balancing local and international forces that influence their professional trajectories.

The research adopted a biographical approach and developed the life histories of eight primary school teachers. In this study, teachers were asked to narrate their experiences with the Erasmus program, focusing specifically on the autonomy challenges arising from their participation. Teacher life histories, their narrations, the composition of narrative episodes, and the analysis conducted by the researcher—depending on the context studied—can serve as a tool for investigating the educational experience from within, from the perspective of those directly involved in the process (Smith, 2013; Tsafos, 2021), while also connecting the social construction of this experience to the broader social context (Goodson, 2019). Eight teachers with multiple experiences of Erasmus project participation were selected through purposive convenience sampling. Their participation was voluntary, and their informed consent was obtained with assurances of anonymity and confidentiality, following the procedures set by the relevant national bioethics authority. Data collection involved two biographical narrative interviews with each teacher, based on semi-structured interview protocols, conducted between November 2021 and April 2022. During these interviews, teachers narrated their life stories before focusing on Erasmus, discussing their motivations for seeking these experiences, narrating them in detail, and describing how they experienced autonomy within Erasmus, as well as the autonomy-related challenges they faced within the school context. The transcribed interviews were then sent to the teachers for review, allowing them to make changes or additions to their narratives, as member-checking enhances the trustworthiness of the results (Creswell & Miller, 2000). Once the participants reviewed, approved, and returned the data, the analysis process began. A combination of analytical methods was employed, specifically thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) and content analysis (Franzosi, 2004). First, the transcripts of both interviews were read multiple times to develop familiarity with the data and conduct an initial coding of the teachers’ narratives. Next, salient patterns across the collected data were identified, leading to the generation of initial themes, including those related to autonomy challenges, before finalizing the coding process in Atlas.ti. Finally, the themes and codes were reviewed alongside sample quotations and interpretations, allowing for comparisons between teachers' narratives to identify similarities and differences in relation to the themes and codes. In this paper, the emphasis was placed on the codes 'Expectations and reasons for participation in Erasmus' and 'Autonomy within and outside Erasmus,' which were used to analyze the data and draw conclusions.

The teachers’ narratives reveal how the Erasmus program creates conditions that facilitate participation and enhance professional subjectivity, particularly in terms of autonomy. Within the local context, teachers often described their professional autonomy as “restricted and relative,” confined mainly to their classroom roles. However, through their participation in Erasmus, all teachers felt they gained a framework and resources that supported their autonomy. A key aspect of this autonomy was the ability to make decisions on various project elements, such as theme selection, partner choice, financial resource allocation, innovation implementation, and teacher mobilities. These opportunities allowed them to experience autonomy that was otherwise absent in their daily teaching practices. Erasmus also enabled teacher coordinators to assess potential partners and decide whom to collaborate with. This autonomy disrupted local administrative hierarchies, redefining teachers as active agents in shaping their professional relationships. In this way, Erasmus shifted control and decision-making power, allowing teachers to influence the structure of their professional networks. Moreover, the program provided teachers with opportunities to explore new approaches to curriculum making. While the official curriculum was perceived as restrictive, Erasmus allowed teachers to create or modify curricula, offering them the flexibility to design an “Erasmian curriculum.” This alternative curriculum was described as more liberating, granting teachers a sense of freedom from institutional constraints and empowering them to become “curriculum makers” who could negotiate new educational frameworks. Despite these opportunities, teachers acknowledged that Erasmus also introduced new governance mechanisms at both national and European levels. Tensions arose, such as when projects could not be transferred between schools or when teachers wished to join a project after it had already started. Nonetheless, the Erasmus program provided a valuable space for teachers to exercise their autonomy and reshape their professional subjectivity within a changing educational landscape.

Barton, L., Barrett, E., Whitty, G., Miles S. & Furlong, J.(1994). Teacher education and teacher professionalism in England: Some emerging issues. British Journal of Sociology of Education. 15, 529-543. Braun, V., & Clarke, V.(2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper (Eds.), APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology (pp. 51-77). American Psychological Association. Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L.(2000).Getting good qualitative data to improve educational practice. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-130. Day, C.(2002). School reform and transitions in teacher professionalism and identity. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 677-692. Esland, G.(1980). Professions and professionalism. In G. Esland and G. Salaman (eds.). The politics of work and occupations (pp. 213-250). Open University Press. Evans, L.(2011). The “shape” of teacher professionalism in England: Professional standards, performance management, professional development and the changes proposed in the 2010 White Paper. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 851-870. Franzosi, R.(2004). Content Analysis. In Μ. Hardy, & Α. Bryman (Eds.), The Handbook of Data Analysis (pp. 547-565). Sage. Furlong, J.(2001). Reforming teacher education, re-forming teachers: Accountability, professionalism and competence. In R. Philip and J. Furlong (eds.). Education reform and the state: Twenty-five years of politics, policy and practice. Routledge Falmer. Goodson, I. F.(2019). The Policy of the Analytical Program and Education. Investigating the Life and Work of Teachers. (Ed.) M. Ioannidou-Koutselinis, S. Philippou & L. Kleridis). Gutenberg. Hargreaves, A.(2000). Four ages of professionalism and professional learning. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 6(2), 151-182. Helsby, G.(1995). Teachers’ construction of professionalism in England in the 1990s. Journal of Education for Teaching. 21(3), 317-332. Parmigiani D., Maragliano, A., Silvaggio, C. & Molinari, A. (2023) Trainee teachers abroad: reflections on personal and professional teaching identity during international mobility. European Journal of Teacher Education, (46)4, 605-620. Smith, B.(2013). Currere and Critical Pedagogy. Think Critically about Self-Reflective Methods. Transnational Curriculum Inquiry, 10 (2), 1-16. Swann, M., McIntyre, D., Pell, T., Hargreaves, L. & Cunningham, M. (2010). Teachers’ conceptions of teacher professionalism in England in 2003 and 2006. British Educational Research Journal, 36(4), 549-571. Tsafos, V.(2021). Αφηγήσεις και Βιογραφίες: Οι «φώνες» των εκπαιδευτικών μέσα από τις ιστορίες ζωής τους. Το Αναλυτικό Πρόγραμμα ως Αυτοβιογραφικό Κείμενο. [Narratives and Biographies: The "voices" of teachers through their life stories.The curriculum as an Autobiographical Text]. GUTENBERG. Webb, R., Vulliamy, G., Hamalainen, S., Sarja, A., Kimonen, E. & Nevalainen, R.(2004). A comparative analysis of primary teacher professionalism in England and Finland. Comparative Education. 40(1), 83-107.