<![CDATA[Decentralized curriculum innovation responds to centralized control that weakens local contextual relevance. Previous studies have largely examined collaborative leadership and grassroots co-design as separate strands, leaving the combined role of these approaches in transforming top-down curriculum management insufficiently explored. This review examines the relationship between these two approaches in English-language, peer-reviewed journal articles published between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2025, and identified through three international databases on July 14, 2026. Thematic analysis of 50 eligible studies addresses three research questions. For RQ1, 32 studies were published in 2023–2025, 23 were conducted in Asia, and 26 employed qualitative designs.Regarding thematic patterns, 32 studies described educational autonomy as an institutional recovery agenda, 22 employed participatory or design-based procedures, and 29 focused on secondary or higher education. The two counts of 32 refer to distinct codes: publication period and the educational autonomy theme. For RQ2, among the 38 studies reporting leadership mechanisms, 26 identified shared authority, 21 reported a safer psychological climate, and 16 described collegial supervision. For RQ3, among the 42 studies reporting practices or barriers, the most frequent practice was place-based inductive pedagogy (22 studies), followed by cross-stakeholder forums (19 studies). The main barrier was the combined challenge of standardized testing and administrative workload (30 studies), followed by bureaucratic resistance and infrastructure limitations (17 studies). This review integrates participatory governance, collaborative and servant leadership, and inductive pedagogy into a unified synthesis framework. Practical implications include sharing authority, convening inclusive design forums, and reviewing uniform test-based accountability.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
