Vocational Education and Training (VET) teachers occupy a distinct and complex professional position at the intersection of vocational practice, education, and labor market regulation. Across Europe, VET teachers are expected to maintain strong occupational competence while simultaneously developing pedagogical expertise, engaging with educational reforms, and supporting increasingly diverse student populations. Research has repeatedly shown that this “double identity” – as both vocational practitioners and teachers – is a defining characteristic of the VET teaching profession (Grollmann, 2008; Köpsén, 2014; Misra, 2011). However, far less attention has been paid to how this double identity shapes VET teachers’ professional development needs after completing formal teacher education.

Existing research has documented fragmented pathways into the VET teaching profession, variations in qualification requirements, and weak or uneven structures for continuing professional development (CPD) for VET teachers (Grollmann, 2008; Misra, 2011). Studies focusing on vocational teacher identity highlight how teachers continuously negotiate boundaries between occupational and educational practices, often prioritizing vocational credibility over pedagogical development, or vice versa, depending on institutional context and career trajectories (Andersson & Köpsén, 2017; Köpsén, 2014). At the same time, research on competencies in VET teaching points to expanding expectations related to digitalization, assessment, inclusion, and collaboration with industry, adding further complexity to teachers’ professional roles (Tapani & Salonen, 2019).

While these studies provide important insights, there remains a significant research gap concerning how VET teachers themselves experience professional development opportunities and barriers in the years following teacher qualification. In particular, there is limited empirical knowledge about what motivates VET teachers to engage in further learning, how they prioritize vocational versus pedagogical development, and how institutional and organizational conditions enable or constrain their professional learning.

This paper addresses this gap by examining the professional development needs of VET teachers in Norway, with a specific focus on how the functions of the double identity shape teachers’ motivations, learning priorities, and perceived barriers to professional development. Norway represents a relevant case within a European context, as VET teacher education is formally regulated and research-based, yet VET teachers operate in a system characterised by strong labor market linkages, vocational specialization, and increasing policy demands for quality, inclusion, and innovation.

The study is guided by the following research questions:

1. What barriers to professional development do VET teachers experience in their everyday professional practice?
2. How do VET teachers negotiate professional development needs connected to their vocational identity and their identity as teachers?

The conceptual framework draws on research on vocational teacher professionalism and identity, particularly the notion of double identity as an analytical lens rather than a fixed attribute. Building on Grollmann’s (2008) emphasis on institutional roles and professional reality, and Köpsén’s (2014) work on identity formation through boundary-crossing, professional development is understood as a situated and context-dependent process shaped by organizational structures, professional cultures, and individual career trajectories. Rather than conceptualizing professional development as participation in formal courses alone, the study adopts a broader understanding that includes informal learning, workplace-based learning, and identity work over time.

The European relevance of the study lies in its contribution to ongoing discussions on how VET systems can support sustainable professional development for teachers operating under hybrid professional expectations. Although the empirical focus is Norway, the challenges addressed – fragmented CPD provision, tensions between vocational and pedagogical learning, and limited institutional support for long-term professional development – resonate across European VET systems (Misra, 2011; Zirkle, Smeplass & Leraand, 2024). By foregrounding teachers’ perspectives, the study offers empirically grounded insights that can inform comparative research, policy development, and the design of professional development structures for VET teachers in Europe.

This study applies a multi-stage mixed-methods design (Creswell, 2014) to examine professional development (PD) needs among VET teachers in Norway. The design is exploratory and sequential, combining qualitative interviews with a subsequent survey to generate both in-depth insights and broader contextual understanding. The study is conducted by a research team of four researchers with experience in VET research and teacher education, allowing for continuous analytical discussion and reflexivity throughout the research process. The first stage consists of semi-structured interviews with 15 VET teachers working in upper secondary education. Participants were strategically selected to ensure variation in vocational clusters, teaching experience, and institutional contexts. The interviews focused on teachers’ experiences with PD after completing formal teacher education, perceived barriers to further learning, and motivations related to both vocational updating and pedagogical development. The interview guide was treated as an iterative research instrument. After the initial interviews, the research team conducted analytical meetings to discuss emerging themes and preliminary interpretations. Based on these discussions, the interview guide was refined to sharpen the focus on tensions between vocational and pedagogical learning, as well as institutional conditions shaping PD opportunities. Additional interviews were then conducted to deepen and clarify central issues. This iterative process strengthened the conceptual sensitivity of the study and ensured close alignment between empirical material and research questions. In the second stage, findings from the interviews informed the development of a survey distributed nationally to more VET teachers. The purpose of the survey was to map PD needs and learning motivations across a broader group of teachers and to examine whether interview-based themes resonated beyond the initial sample. The survey also provides insight into how teachers perceive existing PD provision and identify areas where PD is experienced as fragmented or insufficient. Qualitative interview data is analyzed using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006), enabling systematic identification of recurring patterns related to PD barriers, motivations, and identity-related tensions. The sequential design allows for methodological triangulation, where qualitative findings inform survey construction and survey responses support the interpretation and contextualization of interview data. Together, the two stages contribute to a research-based understanding of how VET teachers navigate PD opportunities and constraints, and how PD needs are shaped by the interaction between vocational identity and teaching practice. Ethical considerations were addressed in accordance with national research ethics guidelines. Participation was voluntary, informed consent was obtained, and all data were anonymized prior to analysis.

The study is expected to provide empirically grounded insights into how VET teachers understand and experience PD in the years following formal teacher education. Rather than treating vocational and pedagogical development as separate domains, preliminary analyses indicate that teachers largely perceive these as intertwined aspects of professional quality. A centrally expected finding is that VET teachers express a strong motivation to continuously update both their vocational competence and their teaching practices, driven by a commitment to teaching quality and concern for their students’ future opportunities. Many teachers emphasize the importance of staying current within their vocation in order to provide relevant, credible, and high-quality instruction, particularly in preparation for students’ transition to apprenticeship after the school-based part of upper secondary education. Professional development is thus closely linked to teachers’ sense of responsibility for supporting young people in developing solid skills and becoming attractive candidates for apprenticeship placements. At the same time, the study is expected to identify a set of recurring barriers that constrain teachers’ ability to engage in PD. These barriers are primarily related to structural and organizational conditions rather than lack of motivation. Teachers frequently point to time pressure, competing work demands, and family obligations as limiting factors. In addition, limited institutional prioritization of VET teachers’ PD—often linked to school leadership’s restricted capacity or understanding of vocational fields—is expected to emerge as a significant obstacle. Analytically, the findings are expected to nuance the concept of double professional identity by showing how vocational pride and commitment to teaching quality are mutually reinforcing rather than contradictory. Teachers’ strong identification with their vocation appears to function as a resource for pedagogical engagement. However, when PD opportunities fail to recognize this integrated professional identity, teachers may experience misalignment between their needs and available provision.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101. Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications. Grollmann, P. (2008). The Quality of Vocational Teachers: teacher education, institutional roles and professional reality. European Educational Research Journal, 7(4), 535-547. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2008.7.4.535?url Köpsén, S. (2014). How vocational teachers describe their vocational teacher identity. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 66(4), 194–211. Misra, P. K. (2011). VET teachers in Europe: Policies, practices and challenges. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 63(1), 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2014.894554 Smeplass, E., Hylander, L., & Zirkle, C. (2024). Roles of science and research in vocational teacher preparation: A case study from a Norwegian VET teacher programme. Nordic Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 14(3), 1–26. https://njvet.ep.liu.se/article/view/50912 Tapani, A. & Salonen, A.O. (2019). Identifying teachers’ competencies in Finnish vocational education. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training, 6(3), 243–260. Zirkle, C., Smeplass, E. & Leraand, A. (2024). VET teacher training: A comparison of university programs in the U.S. and Norway. International Journal of Vocational Education Studies, 1(2), 11-34. https://journals.ub.uni-osnabrueck.de/index.php/ijves/article/view/274