This symposium builds on the Panel Discussion held at ECER 2025: Professional Learning at Scale: Building a Research Agenda. That session highlighted the scarcity of comparative, cross‑national research theorising how professional learning (PL) is organised, governed and enacted at system level – despite renewed international interest in developing teacher learning ecosystems for continuous improvement (Harris & Jones, 2025; Hill et al., 2021). Bringing together cases from Europe and the USA, the panel called for the development of a cumulative knowledge base and more sophisticated conceptual tools for understanding the complex processes through which nations attempt to scale PL.

This symposium responds to that call, aiming to deepen and extend the research agenda articulated last year by presenting four empirically rich, theoretically grounded papers from Scotland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Florida (USA). Each paper examines how research‑informed PL is entangled with system governance, political expectations, evidence infrastructures and evolving roles at the research-practice-policy interface, issues increasingly foregrounded in the literature on system learning and educational improvement (Farrell et al., 2021; Greany & Earley, 2021). Together, these papers ask how PL systems ‘know’ and ‘act’ at scale and what kinds of infrastructures, relationships and evidence make system learning possible.

We begin from the shared recognition that PL at scale cannot be understood through isolated case studies. Instead, it requires cross-context investigation of the structures and politics that support or inhibit system-level learning, including: how evidence is gathered and interpreted; how infrastructure shapes collective inquiry; how stakeholders negotiate competing purposes; and how tensions are handled when demands for fast evidence meet the realities of incremental change. The symposium positions PL as both a multilevel social practice and a site of political contestation.

Paper 1 (Scotland) examines the boundary‑spanning research and evaluation function within the Scottish Government’s Centre for Teaching Excellence. Drawing on expansive learning theory (Engeström & Sannino, 2021) and critical policy sociology, it explores tensions between ‘fast evidence’ demanded by policymakers and slower developmental processes underpinning teacher learning. It reframes evaluation not as compliance, but as a catalyst for system‑level knowing and acting.

Paper 2 (Netherlands) presents a nationwide mixed‑methods study of collective PL, alongside a reflexive analysis of the Dutch Inspectorate’s dual role as evaluator and commissioner. Grounded in complexity theory and ‘steering dynamics’ (Waslander et al., 2020), it illuminates relational tensions across micro, meso, and macro levels, and explores how accountability regimes shape schools’ engagement in collaborative learning.

Paper 3 (Sweden) explores a transforming national landscape marked by close‑to‑practice research funders, university‑based PL, and a large R&D institute connecting hundreds of practitioners and researchers. Drawing on improvement science, networked learning and practice architectures, it offers a meta‑reflective account of partnership, knowledge production and constraints imposed by expectations for immediate impact.

Paper 4 (Florida) analyses a statutory statewide mandate positioning the Lastinger Center as Florida’s partner for research‑based PL. Using implementation science, it details the creation of a data‑intensive EduData R&D hub integrating longitudinal data, secure analytics and rapid‑cycle evaluation. It highlights tensions between rigour, security, political timelines and the need for timely evidence to inform policy.

Collective contribution: Across these diverse settings, this symposium advances the cross‑national research agenda initiated through the 2025 ECER Panel, offering:

1. Comparative insights into national infrastructures for large-scale PL and system learning.
2. Conceptual integration across expansive learning, improvement and implementation science, complexity, networked learning and practice architectures.
3. Commentary on design principles for PL systems that support inquiry, teacher agency and evidence‑informed action.
4. Contribution to a cumulative international knowledge base, responding directly to last year’s call to theorise cross-nationally.

Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2021). From mediated actions to heterogenous coalitions: Four generations of activity theory. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 28(1), 4–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2020.1806328 Farrell, C. C., Penuel, W. R., Coburn, C., Daniel J. & Steup, L. (2021). Research–practice partnerships in education: The state of the field. William T. Grant Foundation. Greany, T., & Earley, P. (2021). School leadership and education system reform: 2nd edition. Bloomsbury. Harris, A., & Jones, M. S. (2025). Professional Learning at Scale-Navigating Complexities and Sustaining Collaboration. Scottish Educational Review, 55(1-2), 128-146. https://doi.org/10.1163/27730840-bja10016 Hill, H., Papay, J., Schwartz, N., Johnson, S., Freitag, E., Donohue, K., Berry, R., III, Loeb, S., Anderson, M., Baker, M., Cato Czupryk, B., Coddington, C., Ehlman, K., Maus, A., Meili, L., Paek, P., Romansky, C., Taylor-Perryman, R., Vu, H., Worthman, S., & Williamson-Zerwic, B. (2021). A learning agenda for improving teacher professional learning at scale. Research Partnership for Professional Learning Waslander, S., Hooge, E., & Drewes, T. (2020). Steering dynamics in education: The interplay between state, market and professionalism. Journal of Educational Change, 21, 227–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09361-6