Transformation of centralized curriculum into classroom practice: An analysis of teachers’ experiences
Abstract
The main purpose of this study is to investigate how teachers transform the centralized curriculum into classroom practice. This study is designed within a phenomenological framework. Specifically, the experiences of seven high school chemistry teachers from three different high schools in Turkey during the implementation of nation-wide curriculum into classroom practice were studied through a qualitative in-depth interview. These teachers were selected based on maximum variation sampling method. A semi-structured interview schedule was designed by the researchers to determine how teachers perceive a nation-wide curriculum and implement it class. A qualitative content analysis approach was used to analyze the data obtained. The results show that the themes of “perception of centralized curriculum”, “perception of teacher role attributed by curriculum,” “transformation of centralized curriculum into thought curriculum,” “internal factors on transformation”, “external influences,” and “reflection back on the curriculum” reflect teachers’ experiences of transforming a centralized curriculum into classroom practice.
Downloads
References
Bezzina, M. (1991). Teachers’ perceptions of their participation in schhol based curriculum development: a case study. Curriculum Perspectives, 11(2), 39-47.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (3rd Ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Duhou, I. A. (1999). School-based management. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. France.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Galton, M., & Blyth, A., (1989). (Ed.) Handbook of Primary Education in Europe. London: David Fulton Publishers.
Hannay, L. (1990). Canada: School-based curriculum deliberation. In C. Marsh, C. Day, L. Hannay, & G. McCutcheon (Ed.), Reconceptualising school-based curriculum development (pp. 140-172). London: The Falmer Press.
Kerr J. F. (1968). Changing the curriculum. London: University Of London Press.
Marsh, C. (1992). Key concepts for understanding curriculum. London: Falmer Press.
Marsh, C. J., & Willis, G. (2003). Curriculum: Alternative approaches, ongoing issues. (3rd Ed.). New Jersey: Allyn & Bacon.
Parke, H. M., & Coble, C. R. (1997). Teachers designing curriculum as professional development: A model for transformational science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(8), 773-789.
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. (3rd Ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Portelli, J. P. (1987). Perspectives and imperatives on defining curriculum. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 2(4), 354-367.
Roehrig, G. H., & Kruse, R. A. (2005). The role of teachers’ beliefs and knowledge in the adoption of a reform-based curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 105(8), 412-422.
Roehrig, G. H., Kruse, R. A., & Kern, A. (2007). Teacher and school characteristics and their influences on curriculum implementation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 883-907.
Skilbeck, M. (1984). School-based curriculum development. London: Falmer Press.
Sowell, E. J. (2005). Curriculum: An integrative introduction. (3rd Ed.). New Jersey: Allyn & Bacon.
Stenhouse L. (1975). An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development. London: Heinemann.
Walton, J. (1978). School-based curriculum development in Australia. Some perspectives on school-based curriculum development. Armidale, Australia: University of New England.
