Background/Purpose Curriculum ownership is crucial to teaching and learning (Kirk & MacDonald, 2001). To facilitate teachers' curriculum ownership and autonomy, a district provided open-ended curricula with no prescribed units and lesson plans. This study examined two teacher's perspectives on teaching an open-ended curriculum and how they each enacted the curriculum in a high school context.
Method Two teachers Lisa and Mary participated in the study. We collected data using non-participant observations, field notes, and semi-structured interviews in the spring semester. Each week we conducted 1~2 observations and at the end we conducted two 45 minute interviews with the teachers separately. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We analyzed the data using open and axial coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Data triangulation among multiple sources was performed to ensure trustworthiness.
Analysis/Results Two salient themes were identified. First, both teachers enjoyed the sense of ownership and autonomy in teaching the open-ended curriculum. They felt that the open-ended curriculum gave them “more freedom/choices” and the old prescribed curriculum “really tied their hands.” Second, their teaching created a vast difference in the gymnasia, with Mary continually using traditional team sports, and Lisa employing various teaching approaches.
Conclusions The data suggested that an open-ended curriculum promoted the teachers' sense of curriculum ownership. Yet, it rendered a strong contrast in the gymnasium. One teacher concerned that some “took advantage of the freedom as the freedom to do nothing.” An open-ended curriculum may only be successful when the teachers care about the profession and student learning (Noddings, 1999).