This qualtiative study aims to explore the dynamic occurrence and influence of multi-intergenerational learning among teachers across three generations. Intergenerational learning is the interactive process of sharing knowledge, skills, experiences, ideas, attitudes, and beliefs between at least two generations (Tambaum, 2023; Mannheim, 1952). Various societies and organizations have adopted this learning format as an essential approach to promote teachers’ continuing professional development (CPD), such as UK, Finland, and European Network for Intergenerational Learning (ENIL) (ENIL, 2012; Geeraerts et al., 2018). Studies have increasingly highlighted its situated nature (e.g., Shulman, 2005; Hiçyılmaz & Polat, 2024). This characteristic emphasizes that teachers from different generations display both continuities and changes in values and behaviors, shaped by distinct historical, social, and cultural conditions. Thus, the occurrence and influence of their learning is impacted by individual, organizational, socio-structural, cultural, and historical factors.

Considerable efforts have been devoted to analysing the roles of individual (e.g., personality and agency) and organisational (e.g., schools) conditions (Geeraerts et al., 2018) between two generations. It is challenging to elucidate the dynamics of intergenerational learning influenced by socio-structural and cultural transformations. Consequently, the effectiveness of such learning may be at risk of being undermined, especially in today’s global environment, which is rife with constant changes and escalating uncertainties. Thus, it is necessary to analyse the transmission and historical shifts of multi-intergenerational learning among teachers within the dynamic social structure.

China exemplifies this context, where the mentor-mentee relationship forms the foundational framework for teacher intergenerational learning to promote CPD. Historically shaped by socio-structural shifts (e.g., the evolution from central planning to a market-led model with government macro-regulation), cultural tensions (e.g., the clash between patriarchal ethical hierarchies in China and the civic-individual rights traditions in Anglo-American contexts), and resulting intergenerational differences (Sandel & D’Ambrosio, 2018; Liu et al., 2025), this framework renders China’s teacher intergenerational learning both connected to and distinct from Anglo-American contexts. Research in this area can thus offer scholars a fresh perspective on multi-intergenerational learning and. By refining strategies, it may encourage educators to participate in and design such learning in China and beyond. However, this context has not been fully discussed and explored.

This research focuses on the multi-intergenerational learning across three teachers representing three generations in the Chinese context. Their relationship can be simplified as the Mentor 1 (i.e., a late-career teacher)-Mentee 1/Mentor 2 (i.e., a mid-career teacher, Mentor 1’s direct mentee, and Mentee 2’s direct mentor)-Mentee 2 (i.e., an early-career teacher and Mentor 2’s direct mentee). Two research questions were put forward to guide this research:

l  How has multi-intergenerational learning among teachers occurred in the Mentor 1-Mentee 1/Mentor 2-Mentee 2 relationship?

l  How has multi-intergenerational learning influenced three generations of teachers in this relationship?

The theoretical framework of this study draws on the learning theory of Illeris (2017). This theory claims that learning is a process in which individuals develop functionality, sensibility, and sociality by negocitating with various (e.g., society, culture, and individuals) conditions. This emphasis guides this study in examining how social, cultural, and historical conditions shape multi‑intergenerational learning among teachers, thereby addressing the first research question. This research used the qualitative case study as a method to explore multi-intergenerational learning among teachers. The qualitative case study excels at answering “how” questions (Yazan, 2015). Instructed by the conceptual framework, this research employed three school teachers in the Chinese context through purposive sampling (Palinkas et al., 2015) with three standards: (a) born in different periods; (b) have established long-term stable intergenerational learning relationships; and (c) have interacted with various factors (e.g., stakeholders, culture, social structure, and history). The following are their details:  Teacher G (Mentor 1): A late-career teacher born in the 1970s.  Teacher Y (Mentee 1/Mentor 2): A mid-career teacher born in the 1980s.  Teacher M (Mentee 2): A late-career teacher born in the 1990s. Following research ethics, we obtained consent from all participants before data collection, including consent for the method, purpose, and use rights of data collection, storage, analysis, and presentation. Subsequently, data were generated through three rounds of interviews with all participants and document collection. Data from these interviews helped us gain a deeper understanding of the participants’ learning pathways, strategies, and impacts. Information from different rounds of interviews also served as a triangulation tool. We also collected documents, including participants’ reflective teaching reports, lecture slides, and published papers. These documents capture the specific participants’ intergenerational interactions, key learning moments, and historically situated sociocultural contexts. Such data can be used to supplement the interview data. This study employed thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) to analyse the collected interview and textual data. Using this method, we ultimately identified six themes and 15 subthemes to answer research questions.

Through data analysis, this study discovered a three-dimensional pathway for the occurrence of multi-intergenerational learning among teachers in the Chinese context and its impacts. The experience of participants revales three pathways of multi-intergenerational learning, including teaching-oriented, ethics-oriented, and auxiliary-oriented pathways. In the content dimension, participants facilitated the intergenerational exchange of pedagogical expertise and experiences through the teaching-oriented pathway, employing core strategies that include lesson preparation and delivery, teaching reflection, and extensive reading. In the incentive dimension, participants followed the ethics-oriented pathway, in which they shared enthical norms and provide positive feedbacks to enchance each other’s moral sense, strengthening their motivation for learning. In the interaction dimension (i.e., the auxiliary-oriented pathway), participants learned how to establish coordinated relationships with stakeholders, organisations, and historically situated sociocultural contexts through three methods: (a) generating pre-experience and hypotheses; (b) providing external professional sources; and (c) interpreting policy and trends in education and other fields. The three pathways facilitate participants to develop themselves in functionality (i.e., improving participant’s pedagogical literacy and leadership, which contributed to the preparation and enactment of their instructional leadership), sensibility (i.e., constructing beliefs about “good” teachers and having a clear career plan, which promoted in shaping and refining participants’ professional identities), and sociality (i.e., strengthening capacities to navigate external relational environments).

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa European Network for Intergenerational Learning. (2012). Intergenerational learning and active Ageing: European Report October 2012. European Commission: Education and Culture DG. Geeraerts, K., Tynjälä, P., & Heikkinen, H. L. T. (2018). Inter-generational learning of teachers: What and how do teachers learn from older and younger colleagues? European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(4), 479–495. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2018.1448781 Hiçyılmaz, G., & Polat, S. (2024). The first steps to generation-friendly schooling: The relationship between intergenerational space, intergenerational solidarity, intergenerational knowledge sharing, and intergenerational learning from the teachers’ perspective. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2024.2362717 Illeris, K. (2017). How we learn: Learning and non-learning in school and beyond (2nd ed.). Routledge. Liu, H., Sammons, P., & Menter, I. (2025). Exploring teacher identity tensions and coping strategies in a comparative case study of primary school teachers’ narratives. Teachers and Teaching, 31(3), 419–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2023.2288627 Mannheim, K. (1952). Essays on the sociology of knowledge. Routledge. Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y Sandel, M. J., & D’Ambrosio, P. J. (Eds.). (2018). Encountering China: Michael Sandel and Chinese philosophy. Harvard University Press. Shulman, L. S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1162/0011526054622015 Tambaum, T. (2023). Intergenerational learning in action. In E. Karen, O. L. Wing, M. Jörg, & Z. Miriam (Eds.), Third international handbook of lifelong learning (pp. 739–762). Springer Cham. Yazan, B. (2015). Three approaches to case study methods in education: Yin, Merriam, and Stake. The Qualitative Report, 20(2), 134–152. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2015.2102