Abstract
The 2018 reform in Finland revised the guidelines for early childhood education (ECE) teachers’ planning, assessment, and development (PAD) time with the purpose of supporting teachers in managing their increased leadership responsibilities and enhancing the quality of ECE. This study examined the PAD time reform through the lens of teacher leadership, investigating how Finnish ECE teachers (n = 282) perceive its impact on the implementation of teacher leadership. The data were collected via an electronic questionnaire and analyzed using data-driven content analysis. The study identified three aspects through which teachers perceived the reform had influenced teacher leadership: leadership responsibilities, expertise and competence, and the culture of teamwork and collaboration. Positive experiences, on the one hand, were associated with the clarification of teachers’ leadership roles within teamwork, as well as improved abilities to manage responsibilities and enhance professional competence and pedagogy. Negative experiences, on the other hand, involved increased administrative tasks, heightened expectations, and a weakened team atmosphere, which hindered teamwork and challenged teacher leadership implementation. The findings suggest the need to clarify the purpose and practices of PAD time, ensure adequate resources for its regular implementation, and organize it to promote teachers’ collegial reflection to support professional development and quality pedagogy.
Introduction
Research on the importance of teacher leadership for children’s learning, quality early childhood education (ECE), and professional development has increased over the past decades (e.g., Bøe and Hognestad, 2017; Sims et al., 2018). Many countries, through administrative and regulatory reforms, have incorporated leadership responsibilities into ECE teachers’ professionalism (Cooper, 2023; Fonsén et al., 2023; Sims et al., 2018; Wang and Zhang, 2024). The ECE field in Finland has undergone similar reforms aimed at clarifying the pedagogical functions of ECE and strengthening teachers’ participation in ECE leadership. The administrative transfer of the ECE sector from the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health to the Ministry of Education and Culture in 2013 was a significant reform. ECE was integrated into the children’s learning pathway through this reform. Following this, the Act on Early Childhood Education and Care (540/2018) was drafted that placed greater emphasis on pedagogy, pedagogical expertise and early childhood education as a planned and goal-oriented entity.
Thus, considering ECE teachers’ professionalism from an organizational, top-down approach (Evetts, 2018), there is a growing expectation for teacher leadership. However, when examined through the lens of professional activities, roles, and practices – occupational professionalism – challenges arise in implementing teacher leadership. Studies highlight gaps in teachers’ leadership skills and difficulties in identifying with leadership roles (Campbell-Evans et al., 2014; Cooper, 2023; Fonsén and Ukkonen-Mikkola, 2019; Kahila et al., 2024). Teachers in Finland work within multiprofessional teams, sharing responsibility for child group activities with childcarers who specialize in care and nurturing, and with social pedagogues whose expertise lies in family work and social service (Ministry of Education and Culture, 2021). Legislation places teachers, due to their pedagogical expertise, with overall responsibility for planning, assessing, and improving pedagogy within their teams (Act, 540/2018; FNAE, 2022); however, studies reveal ambiguities regarding teamwork practices and teachers’ difficulties and reluctance to take responsibility and leadership within their teams (Fonsén et al., 2021; 2023; Kahila et al., 2024; Karila and Kupila, 2023).
Teacher leadership requires both skills and a supportive social and structural setting (Wang and Ho, 2020; Wang and Xia, 2022). The 2018 revision of guidelines in Finland for teachers’ planning, assessment, and development (PAD) time aimed to support teachers in managing their increased pedagogical responsibilities and, consequently, to enhance the quality of ECE (KVTES, 2018). This study examines the PAD time reform through the lens of teacher leadership, exploring how ECE teachers perceive its impact on implementing teacher leadership. The knowledge from this study provides valuable insights for promoting teacher leadership in ECE settings and thus the realization of quality ECE pedagogy.
PAD time reform and teachers’ professionalism in Finnish ECE
Early childhood education in Finland is defined as goal-oriented activities aimed at promoting children’s growth, development, and learning. Based on the Nordic view, it combines teaching, education, and care with an emphasis on pedagogy (Act, 540/2018). Goal-oriented pedagogy necessitates ongoing planning, assessment, and development of practices, learning environments, and professional competence (FNAE, 2022); therefore, teachers have traditionally included dedicated PAD time in their schedules. Teachers in other countries are also allocated time away from direct child group activities for work-related responsibilities, but this time is conceptualized in different terms, such as non-contact time (Hamel, 2021) or planning time (Grisham-Brown and Pretti-Frontczak, 2003). The tasks and purposes of this time vary. PAD time in Finland focuses on planning, assessing, and developing pedagogy.
PAD time practices in Finnish ECE have undergone significant changes over the decades. The function of ECE from the 1980s to the 2010s focused on supporting families with children. ECE was viewed as a crucial service to support parenthood and promote maternal employment. Teachers’ PAD time was reduced during this time. Notably in the 2010s, teaching responsibilities began to be shared more equitably among a multiprofessional ECE team, and the so-called ‘everyone-does-everything’ approach gained popularity. As this approach grew, teachers’ PAD time shifted to the workplace, favoring joint planning, assessment, and development. Teachers’ clear roles in PAD work became blurred during these decades (Onnismaa and Paananen, 2019; Ranta et al., 2021).
Educational and developmental objectives began to be emphasized as part of the functions of ECE from the 2010s onwards (Ranta et al., 2021). The ECE administration moved from the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health to the Ministry of Education and Culture in 2013. Following this change, the documents governing ECE underwent extensive reforms and placed a particular emphasis on pedagogy and pedagogical expertise. The updated Act on Early Childhood Education and Care (540/2018) restructured ECE teams’ composition, occupational titles, and qualification criteria to raise the level of staff training, clarify roles within multiprofessional teams, and improve the pedagogical culture. A staffing reform is currently underway with the aim that by 2030, the teacher is joined in a team of three professionals by either another teacher and a childcarer or a social pedagogue and a childcarer. The teachers have a Bachelor of Education degree from university, social pedagogues hold a Bachelor of Social Service degree from a University of Applied Sciences, and childcarers typically have a vocational qualification in social welfare or health care. These changes have set an emphasis on the importance of clearer interprofessional collaboration among ECE professionals, recognizing and utilizing their diverse expertise in teamwork (Ministry of Education and Culture, 2021).
In these multiprofessional teams, teachers serve as pedagogical experts and, therefore, hold overall responsibility for planning, assessing, and developing pedagogy (FNAE, 2022; Ministry of Education and Culture, 2021). While all team members participate in implementing pedagogy, teachers are expected to ensure that it is of high quality and promotes children’s overall well-being, development, and learning (Act, 540/2018). Since 2013, legislative and curriculum reforms have further clarified and strengthened this pedagogical leadership role (Harju-Luukkainen and Kangas, 2021; Karila and Kupila, 2023). However, despite these well-documented responsibilities, policy documents rarely provide concrete guidance on how to enact these expanding roles in practice (Fonsén et al., 2021; Harju-Luukkainen and Kangas, 2021).
A new 2018 regulation, for its part, further clarified the role of the teacher as a pedagogical leader by allocating PAD time specifically to teachers within ECE teams (KVTES, 2018). It increased teachers’ PAD time from 8 to 13%, corresponding to about five hours per week. PAD time for special education teachers and ECE center directors was also increased accordingly. Teachers’ PAD time is designated for planning, assessment and development work. PAD time also includes managing children's individual ECE plans, which refer to personalized documents outlining each child's development goals, learning objectives, needed support, and individualized pedagogical methods. Teachers are responsible for preparing and updating these individual ECE plans and for considering the documented pedagogical goals when planning the pedagogy for the entire children's group (Act, 540/2018). However, additional time is needed for parent meetings and interprofessional collaboration (KVTES, 2018).
It is the responsibility of the center director to draw up work shift rosters that also account for PAD time. The new regulation (KVTES, 2018) specified that PAD time should be scheduled during regular working hours at times when the teacher’s presence is not needed in the child group. This requires careful planning of staff shifts to ensure children are adequately supervised during that time. Centre directors must consider annual fluctuations in PAD time needs and ensure that appropriate facilities and tools are available for teachers to work productively. In some cases, part of the PAD time may be spent outside the workplace if needed. The regulation applies equally to both municipal and private ECE centres.
With sufficient PAD time, teachers can evaluate practices, develop pedagogy, and clarify goals in their teams, thereby enhancing curriculum implementation (Heikka et al., 2023). However, challenges and variations seem to exist in terms of arranging PAD time and enabling teachers to use it effectively according to the guidelines (OAJ, 2019). A difference has also been reported between municipal and private organizations: although the same regulations apply to both (KVTES, 2018), teachers in private centres appear to use less PAD time than those in municipal settings (OAJ, 2019). Previous studies also highlight that PAD time is an important resource for teachers’ job satisfaction and well-being (Harrison et al., 2019; Heikka et al., 2021; Kusma et al., 2012). At the same time, increased PAD hours have led to more teacher absences from child groups, creating conflicts and concerns about the burden on other team members (Heikka et al., 2021; Cervantes and Öqvist, 2021). This study approaches the PAD reform from the perspective of teachers’ leadership responsibilities and examines how the reform has impacted teacher leadership.
Teacher leadership in ECE
ECE teachers’ leadership responsibilities and actions are referred in this study to as teacher leadership. Teacher leadership in educational settings generally encompasses the teaching tasks and responsibilities expected of a leader (Nguyen et al., 2020). Teacher leadership in the ECE context includes teachers’ responsibilities for leading pedagogy, promoting change, and guiding and organizing teamwork and collaboration in their children's groups and teams (Kahila et al., 2020). Teacher leadership, therefore, involves a range of both direct and indirect, often overlapping, activities, through which teachers aim not only to influence the functioning and mindset of their professional community but also to contribute to the quality and development of the educational environment (Ballaschk et al., 2024; Lund, 2021; Wang and Zhang, 2024).
Research on ECE also discusses teachers’ pedagogical leadership, which can be understood as the core aspect of teacher leadership in ECE (Kahila et al., 2020). Teachers’ pedagogical leadership at its core includes leading pedagogical activities to enhance children's learning, development and well-being (Cheung et al., 2019; Douglass, 2019; Fonsén et al., 2022). It also entails leading pedagogical planning, assessment, and development within staff teams, enhancing team members’ professional development and facilitating parental and interprofessional collaboration (Bøe and Hognestad, 2017; Heikka et al., 2022). Teachers aim to ensure professional practices align with children’s learning and developmental needs, that all professionals within the work community share a common understanding of these goals, and that their actions reflect these objectives (Ballaschk et al., 2024; Bøe and Hognestad, 2017). Teacher leadership may also involve administrative and managerial tasks in addition to pedagogical leadership, which in some settings are part of teachers’ responsibilities (Heikka et al., 2016; Hognestad and Bøe, 2025).
This study anchors teacher leadership within the framework of distributed pedagogical leadership (Heikka, 2014). This means that instead of an individual, formal leader, leadership is exercised as a collective responsibility shared by the entire organization (Gronn, 2000; Spillane et al., 2001). Distributed pedagogical leadership in Finnish ECE involves actors at different organizational levels with distinct but interconnected responsibilities (Heikka, 2014). At the ECE center level, center directors lead the entire work community, while teachers take responsibility for pedagogical leadership within their teams and children’s groups (Fonsén and Ukkonen-Mikkola, 2019; Karila and Kupila, 2023). Teachers also collaborate with other teachers and the director for the improvement of the entire work community (Heikka et al., 2022).
Research shows that effective implementation of distributed pedagogical leadership is linked to the quality of ECE (e.g., Yang and Lim, 2023). It is influential through its participatory and system approach to leading, for example, through joint negotiation of visions and the implementation of coherent strategies (Bøe and Hognestad, 2017; Yang and Lim, 2023). Shared responsibility for development and goal achievement is key to quality practices (Douglass, 2019). Effective teacher leadership supports the goals’ achievement by improving the development practices in children’s groups (Yang and Lim, 2023). Particularly significant for quality is how the teacher leads the staff to reflect on and evaluate their practices (Ballaschk et al., 2024; Waniganayake et al., 2019). Moreover, knowledge and expertise sharing within the team is central for building new knowledge and developing the work community (Resa et al., 2017).
Many factors influence teacher leadership implementation. First, teachers’ personal characteristics, such as job satisfaction, attitudes, leadership views, and professional identities, play a significant role (Ballaschk et al., 2024; Lund, 2021; Wang and Xia, 2022). Professional background and leadership skills (Achituv and Hertzog, 2020a, 2020b) as well as opportunities for professional growth as both teachers and leaders are equally important (Wang and Ho, 2020). Effective teacher leadership requires strong subject knowledge, understanding of quality pedagogy, and skills to justify pedagogical decisions and direct team activities towards pedagogical goals (Fonsén and Ukkonen-Mikkola, 2019). Additionally, promoting critical reflection on practices and fostering community engagement in continuous improvement is essential (Ballaschk et al., 2024; Fitzgerald and Theilheimer, 2013). Research highlights the need to support the development of teachers’ leadership identities and competencies (Campbell-Evans et al., 2014; Fonsén and Ukkonen-Mikkola, 2019; Kahila et al., 2024).
Teacher identity, similar to leadership identity, develops through interactions with personal values and experiences, social context, and organizational culture (Achituv and Hertzog, 2020a; Melasalmi and Husu, 2018). Hence, leadership is always influenced by its environment, including culture, beliefs, values, and expectations (Wang and Ho, 2020; Wang and Xia, 2022). Studies on teacher leadership highlight that teacher leadership is also shaped through interactions with the work community to which teachers belong (Cooper, 2023; Hognestad and Bøe, 2025; Lund, 2021). Feedback and appreciation from the work community are crucial in forming leadership identities and practices (Cooper, 2023; Hard and Jónsdóttir; 2013; Shaik and Rethman, 2025). Center directors, in turn, play a key role in building an understanding of teacher leadership and its importance to the community (Ballaschk et al., 2024). A positive, supportive attitude from the director strengthens teachers’ commitment to leadership (Wang and Xia, 2022).
Teacher leadership is not a formal position in Finnish ECE but a responsibility based on teachers’ pedagogical expertise. This is seen as creating challenges for implementing leadership in a culture with a tendency to emphasize equitable and smooth collaboration (Fonsén et al., 2021, 2023). Despite the fact that the goal of teacher leadership is to promote effective teamwork, where each member’s expertise contributes to quality pedagogy (Ballaschk et al., 2024; Bøe & Hognestad, 2017; Resa et al., 2017), the differentiation of responsibilities and the delegation of leadership to the teacher may create feelings of hierarchy and inequality among team members (Cervantes and Öqvist, 2021; Kahila et al., 2024). Unclear roles between directors and teachers (Fonsén et al., 2021) as well as uncertainties in leadership responsibilities (Ballaschk et al., 2024; Cooper, 2023; Sims et al., 2018) can challenge and limit teachers’ willingness to take responsibility for pedagogy and leadership. Consequently, studies in Finland call for clarification of teachers’ roles as leaders of multiprofessional teams (Fonsén et al., 2021, 2023; Karila and Kupila, 2023; Ministry of Education and Culture, 2021).
Furthermore, resources related to working conditions, such as time for leadership tasks, affect teachers’ ability to implement leadership (Grarock and Morrissey, 2013; Heikka et al., 2023). The 2018 reform in Finland increased the amount of PAD time allocated to teachers (KVTES, 2018). This study explores how teachers perceive the impact of the PAD time reform on implementing teacher leadership. The study’s aims and methodology are described next.
Aims and methods of the current study
This study aims to increase knowledge about Finnish PAD time reform and its significance for teacher leadership in the context of early childhood education (ECE). This study approaches the phenomenon from the perspective of ECE teachers and explores how teachers perceive the significance of PAD reform for implementing leadership. This main aim is addressed through the following two research questions:
How has the PAD reform supported the implementation of teacher leadership, according to ECE teachers? How has the PAD reform challenged the implementation of teacher leadership, according to ECE teachers?
This study investigated ECE teachers’ views on the PAD reform. The data used in this study were collected in February 2019 as part of a larger data collection using an electronic questionnaire (see Heikka et al., 2021, 2023). The questionnaire was designed by the researchers and modified based on feedback from teachers and ECE center directors to ensure its validity. It included three thematic sections: the quality of ECE, well-being at work, and teacher leadership. The well-being section consisted of quantitative questions, while the sections on quality and leadership also included open-ended questions. This study is based on the responses to those open-ended questions, which asked teachers to describe their views and experiences regarding: (1) how changes in PAD time may have affected the quality of pedagogy, (2) the development of pedagogical practices, and (3) the teacher’s pedagogical responsibility and leadership. In addition to the thematic sections, the questionnaire collected background information on the implementation of PAD time, but no identifying participant data were gathered.
In Finland, ECE is primarily provided by the public sector, but services are also available through private providers. The organizational structure of the private sector is diverse, ranging from small enterprises operating a single child group to nationwide chains. Although the aim of this study was not to examine differences in PAD time between public and private ECE settings, efforts were made to recruit a diverse sample representing the Finnish ECE field. Therefore, participants were recruited from both public and private sectors, from municipalities and private organizations of varying sizes, and from different regions across Finland.
The study adhered to the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity guidelines (2019) throughout the process. ECE teachers from ten municipalities and two private organizations operating across several cities were invited to participate after obtaining permission for data collection from them. The researchers did not have direct contact with the participants but sent a survey link via the organizations’ contact persons. Participation in the survey was voluntary. Respondents were provided with written information about the study and asked for consent to use their responses for research purposes. The response period was three weeks, and the survey received responses from 325 teachers. The data used in this study includes open-ended responses, excluding those who only answered quantitative questions. Thus, the participants in this study are 282 teachers, with 87.9% working in municipal ECE centers and 12.1% in the private sector.
Responses were divided into three groups for the analysis, based on the frequency of using PAD time in accordance with the revised regulation: “always/usually” (N = 181), “sometimes” (N = 41), and “seldom/never” (N = 60). The data were then uploaded into the Atlas.ti software used to conduct the analysis. Data-driven content analysis was used to analyze the data, following the steps of Hsieh and Shannon (2005). One researcher facilitated the analysis, but the steps and findings were discussed collaboratively to ensure the trustworthiness of interpretations and results (Carter et al., 2014).
The first step was to code all the items that described the teachers’ views on the reforms’ impact on teacher leadership. The codes with the same content were combined after the first round of coding. Code groups were formed next by analyzing the similarities and differences between the codes. These groups were categorized into three main categories describing the aspects through which teachers perceived the reform to have influenced their leadership (the leadership responsibilities; the expertise and competence; and the teamwork and collaboration culture). Each main category contained both positive factors that supported teacher leadership and negative factors that challenged teacher leadership.
Findings
The ECE teachers in this study perceived that the PAD reform has had both positive and negative effects on teacher leadership. The reform was seen to have had an impact on the implementation of the leadership responsibilities, the expertise and skills required for leadership, and the culture of the team and the work community. We next examine in further detail how the reform was seen to both support and challenge teacher leadership through these identified aspects.
Leadership responsibilities
More diversified implementation of teacher leadership responsibilities
Increased PAD time appears to promote a more diversified implementation of teacher leadership responsibilities according to the ECE teachers in this study. Those teachers who always or usually could utilize PAD time expressed they were pleased with the improved balance between working hours and workload, which also helped them manage their leadership responsibilities.
All teachers, whether PAD time was regular or occasional, praised its significance for planning child group activities, ensuring those were connected to pedagogical goals, and improving the quality of pedagogy. Moreover, teachers who usually or always had PAD time found the increased PAD time was especially beneficial not only for planning but also for assessment and improvement. The following quotes illustrate the strengthening of assessment and development: The teacher has more time to plan and, above all, to assess the activity. The assessment helps to develop the activities in the right direction. In the past, all the time was spent on planning, but there was no time for assessment, so there was no development, and therefore a lack of goals and purpose. (Teacher 165, usually) There is now more time than before for assessment and development. (Teacher 63, usually) Time is needed for assessing and developing pedagogical activities. Currently all PAD time is mainly spent on administrative tasks and daily planning of activities. (Teacher 280, seldom) For example, the teacher has been able to plan the support [for the children] with enough precision to give sufficient guidance to others in the implementation of the support. The teacher has also been able to plan the team’s activities more precisely. (Teacher 168, usually) There has been more pedagogical reflection and more focus on team management. (Teacher 159, usually)
More PAD time was also directed toward assessing and improving teamwork practices. Teachers were satisfied that the reform allowed them to better create understanding about pedagogical issues and strengthen essential pedagogical skills in their work community. The following quotes highlight how the expanded opportunities to enhance their own expertise through seeking new knowledge and reading professional literature have been particularly helpful. These activities were considered crucial for sharing expertise within the team and improving others’ competence. There’s been time to study new information, for example, new curriculum, new documents on children, and this has allowed you to bring information to others on how to work in certain new ways. (Teacher 61, usually) Teachers now have more time to gather their thoughts and organize the details before passing the message on to the rest of the team and other parties. (Teacher 63, usually)
Increased PAD time was also perceived as enabling teachers to involve both children and parents more effectively. Strengthened assessment has made it easier to consider children’s needs and interests in planning, and more PAD time has allowed for the creation of fresh approaches to promote both children’s and parents’ involvement.
Expanded tasks challenging the implementation of leadership responsibilities
The PAD reform was seen, for the most part, as providing more time for leadership responsibilities. However, some teachers noted that it had also expanded their administrative workload, which was seen as consuming a significant portion of PAD time. This experience, for example, can be seen in the following excerpt: Due to the guidance of directors and the city administration, the PAD time has been spent mostly on administrative work, which is not related to the actual pedagogy in any way. Systems, surveys, reports, and training that goes beyond pedagogy take up all the planning time. […] PAD time is now a big administrative cost. (Teacher 144, seldom)
Expertise and competence
Enhanced competence and confidence in implementing leadership
According to teachers’ perceptions, the PAD reform, when implemented, appears to promote teachers’ competence and confidence in pedagogy and leadership. The reform was viewed to have clarified the importance of teachers’ pedagogical expertise, which has strengthened their confidence in their actions. The alignment between responsibilities and teacher’s expertise and competencies has also improved.
Teachers who usually, always or sometimes used PAD time expressed satisfaction with the improved opportunities for preparation, orientation, and deepening their understanding. This is reflected, for example, in the following quotes: It’s easier to take responsibility when there’s time to invest in the work and thoroughly understand the matters at hand. (Teacher 20, sometimes) Responsibility is easier to bear when there’s enough time to truly gather information and pause to reflect on things. (Teacher 165, usually) Because there is more time to familiarize oneself with matters, one can also delve deeper into them, which in turn leads to being ‘more aware’ of the issues and, consequently, being able to ‘lead’ the work more effectively. (Teacher 266, usually)
Teachers who were able to spend PAD time always, usually, or sometimes also expressed satisfaction with the improved opportunities for collaboration and peer support within the work community. As shown in the following quotes, the increased PAD time had facilitated collaboration and pedagogical discussion with teachers from other children's groups: Pedagogical discussions have increased among early childhood education teachers (professional support) (Teacher 265, usually) Collaboration with other teachers… peer support (Teacher 305, usually)
Increased pressure and uncertainty towards leadership
Teachers generally felt that the PAD reform had improved understanding of leadership as part of the ECE teacher’s profession, contributing to its implementation. However, some teachers felt that it had also raised the pressures placed on teachers, especially when there were challenges in utilizing PAD time. Awareness of expectations and leadership responsibilities has increased the pressure to complete these tasks carefully and effectively. These experiences are reflected in the following excerpts: [PAD time] obliges us to look into matters, as there is a designated time specifically allocated for handling necessary tasks. Childcarers also refer to this PAD time and expect results from the time we spend on it. (Teacher 270, usually) Expectations and implementation sometimes conflict. Some of the planning done at the workplace is difficult to put into practice, and PAD time often gets consumed by other tasks. The responsibility feels heavy because there is no time to implement PAD work, and both personal and others’ expectations are high. This creates additional stress. (Teacher 239, sometimes) Work tasks and responsibilities have been increasingly shifted onto us. Too many things are expected to be managed during PAD time. In my opinion, PAD time does not adequately serve the purpose of planning and developing work. At the very least, coping at work is at its limits, as too much of my personal free time is spent handling work tasks on my own time because they cannot be completed during working hours. (Teacher 134, usually)
Teamwork and collaboration culture
Clarified roles and responsibilities of team members
Teachers saw the reform as a whole as clarifying the importance of pedagogy in ECE’s core mission and, consequently, increasing their understanding of the significance of pedagogical expertise and competence as prerequisites for quality pedagogy. In this way, the reform was also seen as clarifying the teachers’ pedagogical leadership role within the multi-professional team, supporting their ability to take responsibility for pedagogy. This experience is reflected in the following examples from the data: It [the PAD time reform] has increased the understanding that the teacher has overall responsibility for the pedagogical leadership of the group. (Teacher 58, sometimes) PAD time has further clarified roles and responsibilities between professional groups, emphasizing appreciation for each professionals contributions. (Teacher 316, usually)
Weakened the atmosphere in the work community
The downside of the reform, meanwhile, was that some teachers felt the atmosphere between professionals had worsened, with increased feelings of inequality, particularly regarding the perception that teachers were more valued than childcarers and social pedagogues. Several teachers also expressed concern about the burden on other professional groups during teachers’ PAD time. Some teachers mentioned being questioned about the need for PAD time, which in turn led them to forgo using it. Such concerns and a climate of confrontation were seen as challenges to leadership.
For example, in the following excerpts, teachers describe encountering childcarers’ negative attitudes toward teachers’ PAD time: I have learned to appreciate my role as a teacher and my pedagogical leadership within the team more. On the other hand, it has taken time for the childcarers to understand the importance of PAD time (which also involves a lot of mental work and thinking about what to plan), and they have at times felt exhaustion from the fact that teachers are often away from the group in the afternoons. (Teacher 74, usually) Childcarers are bitter that ECE teachers have the right to plan. They feel it is taken away from them and they are not valued. A lot affects the team atmosphere. (Teacher 169, usually) In my opinion, enough time has been planned and allocated for the week/month. The problem is that it cannot be taken without causing frustration in the neighboring team or within my own team, which completely ruins the atmosphere and prevents the entire PAD time from being held. (Teacher 149, never) The responsibility is almost entirely on the teacher. The teacher is the one who does everything. The childcarers ‘complain’ that the teachers are always planning. As a result, the teachers also lead nearly all activities. […] The increased PAD hours have been really necessary, but there is also a downside to it. (Teacher 4, usually) Pedagogical responsibility is now also seen as the teacher’s duty to guide and plan all activities in the ECE center, including those that may not necessarily be related to pedagogical work. (Teacher 279, seldom)
Discussion
The guidelines in Finland for ECE teachers’ PAD time were revised in 2018. This study examined this reform from the teachers’ perspectives, focusing on its impact on teacher leadership – how it has supported and challenged its implementation. The study identified three aspects through which the reform, according to teachers, has influenced teacher leadership: leadership responsibilities, expertise and competence, and the culture of teamwork and collaboration. The PAD time reform was largely perceived as positive and supportive of teacher leadership, although some teachers also noted negative experiences and challenges.
Based on the findings, teachers felt that the increased PAD time enhanced their ability to fulfill leadership responsibilities, supported the strengthening of their pedagogical and leadership skills, and clarified both the core mission of ECE and the teachers’ role as team leaders. However, some teachers reported increased administrative tasks, heightened expectations, and a weakened team climate, which added pressure, created feelings of inadequacy, and challenged teachers in assuming leadership roles. These contradictory findings will be discussed in more detail next.
PAD reform and teacher leadership through the lens of teacher's identity and competences
Teachers’ professional identity plays a significant role in how teachers implement leadership (Cooper, 2023). Previous research highlights teachers’ struggles to see leadership as part of their professionalism and their reluctance to lead teams (Ballaschk et al., 2024; Cooper, 2023; Kahila et al., 2024). These challenges are seen in Finnish ECE to stem, in one respect, from ambiguities in ECE’s core mission and professionals’ roles within multiprofessional teams (Fonsén et al., 2021; Karila and Kupila, 2023). Teachers in this study perceived the PAD reform as having clarified the pedagogical function of ECE and of the teachers’ role as their teams’ pedagogical leaders. Consequently, the findings suggest that the reform has clarified the meaning of leadership as part of teachers’ professionalism at the organizational level (see Evetts, 2018), supporting teachers at the occupational level in building their teacher-leader identity and assuming leadership responsibilities.
Teachers’ pedagogical competence, leadership skills, and opportunities for continuous professional development are also essential for teacher leadership (Fonsén and Ukkonen-Mikkola, 2019; Wang and Ho, 2020). This study suggests that PAD time supports teachers in developing their pedagogical expertise and confidence to lead pedagogy in their teams. This is a significant finding, because previous research highlights gaps in teachers’ leadership skills (Campbell-Evans et al., 2014; Fonsén and Ukkonen-Mikkola, 2019; Kahila et al., 2024). According to this study’s teachers, PAD time has supported them in strengthening their expertise and competence, especially when used for collegial discussion and reflection with other teachers (see also Melasalmi and Husu, 2018; Resa et al., 2017; Shaik and Rethman, 2025). Consequently, this study aligns with previous findings that peer mentoring between teachers is vital for teachers’ leadership development (Fitzgerald and Theilheimer, 2013). Collaborative reflection clarifies perceptions, refines goals, and builds confidence in leadership.
Indeed, teachers’ strong professional identity and confidence in their leadership skills are important for their engagement in leadership (Wang and Xia, 2022). However, teacher leadership is shaped not only by teachers’ personal skills and perceptions but also through interactions within the work community (Achituv and Hertzog, 2020a; Ballaschk et al., 2024; Cooper, 2023; Lund, 2021; Melasalmi and Husu, 2018). This dimension is evident in the findings of this study. The reform has clarified teachers’ leadership roles, although some teachers still face negative attitudes and resistance towards teacher leadership within their work communities (see also Cervantes and Öqvist, 2021; Heikka et al., 2021). Doubts about the necessity of PAD time and related tensions create nervousness and insecurity in implementing leadership. The results indicate ongoing ambiguities and misunderstandings related to the purpose and practices of the PAD time, which may partly explain the negative attitudes reported by teachers in this study. Therefore, clarifying the meaning and practices of PAD time within ECE communities is essential.
On the one hand, these results can be interpreted as reflecting teachers’ loyalty to smooth, equitable teamwork and the tendency to avoid upsetting the work community (Cervantes and Öqvist, 2021; Cooper, 2023; Kahila et al., 2024). This so-called niceness culture has been identified as a mindset limiting leadership in ECE (Hard and Jónsdóttir; 2013; Lund, 2021). Concerns about PAD time seen as prioritizing teachers over other professionals were evident in this study and hindered teachers from implementing leadership (see also Cervantes and Öqvist, 2021). On the other hand, negative attitudes toward teacher leadership may also stem from misunderstandings about its collaborative nature. Previous research shows that leadership is often associated with authoritarian, top-down management (Cooper, 2023; Hard and Jónsdóttir, 2013), which can foster negative attitudes toward teacher leadership and concerns about hierarchy and inequality within teams.
Thus, while the PAD reform appears to have clarified teachers’ roles as pedagogical experts and leaders and supported their identity and competence development, the findings highlight the need for a deeper understanding of teacher leadership in ECE teamwork (see also Hognestad and Bøe, 2025). Clarifying the collaborative nature of teacher leadership (Wang and Zhang, 2024) and the significance of PAD time for supporting both pedagogy and teamwork is important. Additionally, clarifying the roles of all professionals in the ECE teams in relation to ECE’s core mission could prevent experiences of inequality and support teachers in implementing leadership.
PAD reform and teacher leadership through the lens of improving the quality of pedagogy
Teacher leadership is important for implementing quality pedagogy (e.g., Ballaschk et al., 2024; Cheung et al., 2019; Douglass, 2019; Fonsén et al., 2022). This study suggests that the PAD time reform itself has clarified the pedagogical focus of ECE and thus strengthened goal-orientation in practice. Previous research (Authors, 2019) shows that variation exists in the extent to which assessment has been used in planning. The increased PAD time has allowed teachers to not only plan direct pedagogical activities with children but to also focus on indirect activities, such as observing learning environments, assessment, research-based improvement, and enhancing pedagogical competence within their work community. These are key objectives of teacher leadership (Hognestad and Bøe, 2025; Kahila et al., 2020) and important prerequisites for improving quality of pedagogy (Ballaschk et al., 2024; Douglass, 2019; Resa et al., 2017).
Central to pedagogical development is the ability to sustain ongoing critical reflection and challenge conventional thinking (Fonsén and Ukkonen-Mikkola, 2019). Based on this study, PAD time seems to serve as an important resource for supporting teachers’ reflection - both independent and inter-professional. Teachers who were able to use their PAD time to share experiences and engage in joint reflection with other teachers were particularly satisfied with the PAD reform (see also Resa et al., 2017). This shared reflection provided support not only for the development of their own skills and confidence but also helped them identify improvement needs within their teams and the wider work community.
Thus, this study supports the view that the amount of PAD time allocated to teachers impacts their ability to implement leadership that promotes quality pedagogy (Grarock and Morrissey, 2013; Heikka et al., 2023). However, it is important to note that it was precisely those teachers who used PAD time in line with the reform that described a strengthening of pedagogical development. In contrast, those without regular PAD time faced challenges in pedagogical assessment and development. The findings therefore reflect the need to improve the organization of PAD time in a way that supports not only planning but also assessment and development of pedagogy. It is also important to enable teachers to spend PAD time together to form professional learning communities for critical reflection.
PAD reform and teacher leadership through the lens of occupational well-being
Based on this study, the PAD time reform, particularly the increase in PAD time, has supported teachers in managing their workload, including multiple leadership responsibilities. This is crucial from a well-being perspective, given the concerns raised in previous studies about challenging working conditions, scarce resources, a tightening economic situation, and low retention in ECE (Grant et al., 2019; Heilala et al., 2021). This study suggests that PAD time, when implemented, serves as a valuable resource for teachers’ well-being (Harrison et al., 2019; Heikka et al., 2021; Kusma et al., 2012). This is also significant for teacher leadership, because teachers’ job satisfaction contributes to their willingness to engage in leadership (Wang and Xia, 2022).
Nevertheless, some findings of the study highlight aspects that have strained professionals’ well-being (Heikka et al., 2021). First, some teachers felt that the PAD reform has, in a way, increased expectations and pressures on teachers. Some also reported increased administrative tasks being assigned to teachers. However, it is not possible to say whether this is specifically due to the reform or to the overall growing complexity of teachers’ tasks (e.g., Harju-Luukkainen and Kangas, 2021; Oosterhoff et al., 2020). Second, the data revealed experiences that indicate the PAD reform has created feelings of inequality among team members and weakened the team climate, negatively impacting occupational well-being. Teachers similarly expressed concerns about the strain on childcarers, because the increase in PAD time led to more teacher absences from the children’s groups.
The results are therefore ambiguous regarding occupational well-being (see also Heikka et al., 2021). The key issue is the organization of PAD time. A report by OAJ (2019) highlighted the importance of clear instructions from municipal leaders and ECE center directors regarding the use of PAD time, as well as careful planning of PAD hours within work schedules, in supporting teachers to utilize their PAD time effectively. Therefore, it is crucial for leaders to invest in careful planning of PAD hours. Based on the findings of this study, the organization of PAD time must consider staff resources to ensure teachers can participate without raising concerns about other staff. A risk exists otherwise that PAD time may be underused, which, in turn, will negatively affect pedagogy, leadership, and teachers’ well-being. Attention should also be paid to the content of PAD time, focusing it on areas aligned with the teachers’ responsibilities.
Limitations and future research
It is important to interpret the results of this study in the context of the time when the data were collected. The PAD reform was recent and its practices were still developing, so it is natural that the findings highlight challenges and variability in organization and practices that have limited PAD time implementation and teacher leadership. The alignment between culture, resources, and ideal PAD time practices had not yet been achieved. Thus, further research is needed to assess the current state of PAD time and its impact on teacher leadership. Future studies should explore which PAD practices best support pedagogy and teacher leadership and how these can be organized to promote the well-being of both teachers and other professionals in the work community.
This study examined PAD time benefits and challenges from ECE teachers’ perspectives. However, since PAD time is also closely linked to ECE teams’ other professionals, it is important to examine its organization and significance from their viewpoints. Additionally, leadership is influenced by various factors (Wang and Ho, 2020; Wang and Xia, 2022); thus, further research could explore how PAD time interacts with other factors influencing teacher leadership. For example, more understanding is needed regarding the factors that influence whether teachers maintain or give up PAD time under pressure.
Conclusion
This study examined ECE teachers’ perceptions of the impact of Finland’s 2018 PAD reform on teacher leadership. Teachers reported both positive and negative effects on leadership responsibilities, expertise and competence, and the culture of teamwork and collaboration. The reform was perceived to have clarified teachers’ roles as their teams’ pedagogical leaders and supported them in managing their responsibilities and developing both pedagogy and professional expertise. However, some teachers felt it had increased teachers’ administrative tasks and expectations and weakened team atmosphere, posing challenges to teacher leadership implementation.
Overall, this study highlights PAD time as an important factor in supporting teacher leadership, work management, and quality pedagogy. However, its implementation in ECE organizations still requires improvement. Promoting positive attitudes and understanding the meaning of teachers’ PAD time for teamwork and pedagogy among staff by the ECE leaders is essential, alongside ensuring adequate resources for its regular use without overburdening staff. Furthermore, this study strongly recommends organizing PAD time to facilitate collaboration and joint reflection among teachers to promote both professional development and pedagogical improvement.
The study also recommends involving teacher education in increasing understanding of the significance and practices related to PAD time, thereby promoting the enactment of teacher leadership. It is important that teacher education enhances awareness of the role of PAD time in supporting high-quality pedagogy and clarifies the opportunities it provides for teachers’ collegial support and ongoing professional development. The research-based exploration of these perspectives is of equal importance and relevance in both pre-service and in-service teacher education programs. Knowledge and understanding of the significance and potential of PAD time can strengthen teachers’ commitment to its use and support them in carrying out their professional responsibilities in alignment with pedagogical ideals and goals.
Footnotes
Ethical approval and informed consent statements
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.