In the global educational landscape, teachers have encountered challenges to their autonomy, due to the increasing standardization and regulation within national education systems (Burkhauser & Lesaux, 2017; Haugen, 2019; Hodge, 2018). However, South Korea, in contrast to this trend, has recently implemented a unique curriculum reform policy, deviating from its historically centralized education system. The Korean education system, traditionally guided by a national curriculum system specifying subjects and lesson hours (Gim, 2012; Park & Kim, 2014), has been heavily focused on preparing students for college entrance exams, thereby limiting both teachers’ autonomy and students’ learning opportunities (Kim, 2021).

To address these concerns, Korea introduced 'the exam-free semester system' in 2016 for middle schools (grades 7 to 9) (Kim & Joo, 2022). This policy aims to counteract the prevailing test-oriented school culture by providing teachers with greater autonomy in curriculum operation. During one semester of the three-year middle school program, there are no formal examinations, and schools are encouraged to offer diverse classes to allow students to explore their interests and talents, relieving them from exam-related stress.

In this decentralized curriculum structure, teachers encounter both opportunities and challenges. While they appreciate the newfound autonomy in planning and implementing the curriculum, they also face difficulties in designing exam-free semester activities and employing unfamiliar teaching methods.

The study operates under the assumption that new curriculum policies at the national level do not directly translate into implementation at the school level; rather, they involve an active process of interpretation by teachers. Teachers engage in sense-making when encountering a new policy, organizing it within their cognitive framework (Coburn, 2006; Spillane et al., 2002). Sense-making, described by Weick (1995), is an ongoing organizing process that occurs when unexpected events happen, influenced by existing knowledge, beliefs, and contextual conditions.

Teachers’ interpretation of reform messages during policy implementation is not a simple technical process but an active sense-making influenced by their interests, beliefs, and contextual factors (Alvunger, 2018; Leijen et al., 2020; Luttenberg et al., 2013). Teachers’ engagement in curriculum reform is shaped by this sense-making process (Pietarinen et al., 2019), leading to responses such as distantiation, toleration, assimilation, and accommodation (Luttenberg et al., 2013).

Complete curriculum reform, according to Fullan (2015), occurs when the intended reality is created and shared among implementing agents. Therefore, it is crucial to understand how teachers construct and execute the meaning of reform messages, considering differences among teachers and the dynamics in their interpretive practices. Drawing on sense-making theory, this study investigates how Korean teachers make sense of messages and mandates from the state-driven curriculum decentralization policy, specifically focusing on the exam-free semester system and how these meanings shape teachers’ teaching practices for curriculum reforms. 

A case study was conducted to explore teachers’ sense-making in response to the new national curriculum policy, known as the exam-free semester system, in two middle schools within the same Korean school district. The selection of these schools considered variations in size, structure, and culture to examine how the reform policy unfolds in diverse school contexts and identify influencing factors. School A, a public middle school, features three classes per grade. Due to its smaller size, teachers instruct the same subject across different grades, managing multiple administrative tasks. Despite the existence of a professional learning community, its functionality is limited. On the other hand, School B, another public middle school, has five to six classes per grade and has developed a democratic school culture, supported by administrative staff, thereby reducing teachers’ non-teaching responsibilities. This school exhibits various professional learning communities that have been in operation for over a decade through teachers’ voluntary participation. Six teachers, three from each school (Kim, Yun, Park from School A, and Lim, Lee, Kang from School B), participated in the study. Data were collected through in-depth, semi-structured interviews, conducted twice with each teacher at intervals, lasting approximately two hours each. Open-ended questions covered teachers’ educational knowledge, beliefs, perceptions of the exam-free semester system, agreement with its demands, and factors influencing understanding. Additional inquiries focused on teaching practices before and after policy implementation, challenges faced, and school support. To illustrate the diverse implementation of the exam-free semester system, the analysis began with interviews from School A and then moved to those from School B. The aim was to identify each teacher’s sense-making characteristics, similarities, and differences within School A, while understanding these in relation to the school’s unique features. A similar process was repeated for School B interviews, resulting in emergent coding themes (Saldaña, 2021). These themes guided the reexamination and recategorizations of teacher interviews, enabling a cross-comparison between School A and School B to reveal the multiple dimensions influencing teachers’ sense-making of new national curriculum reforms.

The comparative analysis of six teachers’ sense-making revealed both similarities and differences between the two schools and within each school regarding the exam-free semester system. Teachers at School A, when contrasted with School B, commonly perceived the new policy as burdensome. Specifically, Kim and Yun at School A made sense of the policy through toleration, while Park at the same school constructed meaning through distantiation. In School B, Kang and Lee interpreted the policy through assimilation, while Lim did so through accommodation. The divergent interpretations within the same school could be attributed to each teacher’s unique past experiences and philosophies. However, it’s crucial to recognize that individual lived histories are not the sole factors influencing teachers’ sense-making of curriculum reforms. The school’s structure and culture, influenced by collaborative learning, spatial organization, teacher workload, and a democratic school culture, also played a significant role. Despite the structural extension of teacher autonomy for decentralized curriculum and teaching at the national level, teachers’ sense-making of curriculum policy reform was shaped by the relational effects of their professional experiences, bounded autonomy for teaching and administrative duties, and opportunities for growth and interaction within the school. Emphasizing the importance of considering the relational aspects in education practices, this study argues that understanding teachers’ varied interpretations and practices necessitates looking beyond the isolated element of extended freedom for curriculum and teaching. This study suggests moving beyond authoritative and state-centered perspectives on educational changes. Future research should delve deeper into how curriculum policy relates to factors such as teachers’ lived history and the structural and cultural conditions of the school in practice. By exploring the intricate relationships within these dimensions during policy implementation, a more comprehensive understanding of how teachers interpret and enact externally driven curriculum reforms can be achieved.

Alvunger, D. (2018). Teachers’ curriculum agency in teaching a standards-based curriculum. The Curriculum Journal, 29(4), 479-498. Burkhauser, M. A., & Lesaux, N. K. (2017). Exercising a bounded autonomy: Novice and experienced teachers’ adaptations to curriculum materials in an age of accountability. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 49(3), 291–312. Coburn, C. E. (2006). Framing the problem of reading instruction: Using frame analysis to uncover the microprocesses of policy implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 43(3), 343-379. Fullan, M. (2015). The new meaning of educational change. Teachers College Press. Gim, C. C. (2012). A study on the improvement of setting annual instructional time for the five-schoolday-a-week system in Korea. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30(2), 27-49. Haugen, C. R. (2019). A fragile autonomy in a performativity culture? Exploring positions in the recontextualizing field in a Norwegian rural municipality. Journal of Education Policy, 34(1), 133-152. Hodge, S. (2018). Standardised curriculum and hermeneutics: The case of Australian vocational educators. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 50(1), 38-55. Kim, D. (2021). What did the national curriculum system leave us for the past 75 years since the liberation? Journal of Educational Innovation Research, 31(2), 115-141. Kim, H. & Joo, Y. (2022). An analysis of the operational condition and improvement plan for exam-free semester system in Korean middle schools. The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 39(2), 117-142. Leijen, Ä., Pedaste, M., & Lepp, L. (2020). Teacher agency following the ecological model: How it is achieved and how it could be strengthened by different types of reflection. British Journal of Educational Studies, 68(3), 295-310. Luttenberg, J., Imants, J., & Van Veen, K. (2013). Looking for cohesion: The role of search for meaning in the interaction between teacher and reform. Research Papers in Education, 28(3), 289-308. Park, C., & Kim, K. J. (2014). Cross-curricular themes and lesson hours outlined by legislation and government policy to be implemented at schools. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(3), 71-93. Pietarinen, J., Pyhältö, K., & Soini, T. (2019). Shared sense-making in curriculum reform: Orchestrating the local curriculum work. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 63(4), 491-505. Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage. Spillane, J., Reiser, B., & Reimer, T. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 387-431. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Sage.