This paper examines teachers’ valuation of three types of knowledge sources required in their professional work over the past two decades. The understanding and shaping of professional competence and knowledge are not developed in a vacuum by single individuals but affected by a plethora of processes between teachers, researchers, politicians, labour unions and other actors within the educational sector and by the different socio-cultural contexts where the processes play out (e.g. Beijaard, Meijer and Verloop, 2004; Godfrey and Brown, 2019). Educational policy reforms worldwide have emphasized strengthening teachers’ theoretical knowledge base (Dahl et al., 2016). Parallel to the expansion of the knowledge dimension, there has been a strengthening of the relational dimensions of teachers’ role. This expansion is clearly evident in educational policy documents which emphasise inclusion and teachers’ societal mandate (Haug, 2020; Faldet, Knudsmoen & Nes, 2022). The analysis is informed by theories of teachers’ heterogenous knowledge base (Grimen, 2008; Shulman, 1987) and through the lens of Professional Capital (Hargreaves and Fullan, 2012). Data is drawn from two cross-sectional surveys of teachers working in compulsory schools (grades 1-10) in Norway, conducted in 2008 (N=2150) and 2021/2022 (N=615). Using the same item batteries enables trend comparisons over time, despite potential differences in question interpretation. Linear regression models investigate changes in teachers’ perceptions of social and disciplinary knowledge. Preliminary findings indicate a significant shift in the competencies teachers value for professional success. Socio-relational competencies were markedly more important to teachers in 2022 compared to 2008. Conversely, disciplinary knowledge was more valued in 2008. These changing perceptions also vary across teachers’ experience levels, age, and the ages of their pupils. Notably, educational background was an explanatory variable in 2008 but not in 2022, suggesting shifts relevant to educational policy. This study contributes to understanding the contextual factors that shape teachers' changing perceptions of knowledge. The evolving prioritization of different types of knowledge reflects the dynamic challenges teachers face in their professional roles.

References Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., and Verloop, N. (2004), “Reconsidering research on teachers' professional identity”. Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol 20 No 2, pp. 107–128. Dahl, T., Buland, T., Finne, H., & Havn, V. (2016). Kunnskapsbasert praksis i utdanningssektoren [Research-based practice in the educational sector]. Trondheim: SINTEF. Faldet, A.-C., Knudsmoen, H., and Nes, K. (2022), “Inkluderingsbegrepet under utvikling? En analyse av de norske læreplanverkene L97, LK06 og LK20. Nordisk tidsskrift for pedagogikk og kritikk”, Vol 8, pp. 171–188. Godfrey, D., and Brown, C. (2019), An Ecosystem for Research-Engaged Schools: Reforming Education Through Research. Routledge. Grimen, H. (2008). Profesjon og kunnskap. In A. Molander & L. I. Terum (Eds.), Profesjonsstudier (pp. 71-86). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Hargreaves, A. and Fullan, M. (2012), Professional Capital: Transforming Teaching in Every School. Teachers College Press. Haug, P. (2020), “It is impossible to avoid policy’ comment on Mel Ainscow: promoting inclusion and equity in education: lessons from international experiences”. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, Vol 6 No 1, pp. 17-20. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-23.