Which Characteristics of Gifted Students Should Be Developed? Student, Teacher and Parent Opinions
Keywords:
Özel yetenekliler, paydaş görüşü, BİLSEM, öğrenme alanları, Gifted students, stakeholder opinion, science and art centers, learning areasAbstract
Abstract
The aim of this research was to investigate parent, student and teacher opinions about which characteristics of gifted students should be developed in cognitive, affective, psycho- motor and social learning areas. The partici- pants included 609 gifted students, 350 parents and 157 teachers from Science and Art Canters. Participants were surveyed using “The Which Characteristics of Gifted Students Should Be Developed”. The results of research revealed that students, parents and teachers agreed that social and affective skills should be improved. On the other hand, they held different opin- ions on the importance of music, art, dance, role-play, sport, domestic economy skills. This result indicates that these skills are thought by participants to be less important for gifted stu- dents’ development. In addition, teachers did not think technology so important for the de- velopment of gifted students, placing more emphasis on cognitive and affective domains.
Öz
Bu çalışmada amaç veli, öğrenci ve öğretmen paydaşlarının, özel yetenekli öğrencilerin biliş- sel, duyuşsal, psikomotor ve sosyal öğrenme alanlarıyla ilgili ne gibi özelliklerin geliştiril- mesi gerektiğine ilişkin görüşlerini belirlemek- tir. Araştırmaya 609 özel yetenekli öğrenci, 350 özel yetenekli çocuğu olan veli ve 157 BİLSEM öğretmeni katılmıştır. Araştırma tarama mode- li kullanılarak yürütülmüştür. Araştırmada ve- ri toplama aracı olarak “Özel Yeteneklilerin Hangi Özellikleri Geliştirilmeli?” anketi kulla- nılmıştır. Çalışma sonuçları öğrencilerin, veli- lerin ve öğretmenlerin sosyal ve duyuşsal be- cerilerinin geliştirilmesi gerektiği konusunda hem fikir olduklarını ama müzik, resim, dans, rol yapma, spor becerileri, ev ekonomisi ve ev yönetimi becerilerinin geliştirilmesi konusun- da farklı düşündüklerini göstermiştir. Ayrıca öğretmenlerin gelişmiş teknoloji kullanma be- cerisinin önemi konusunda da farklı düşün- dükleri, bu becerinin özel yetenekli öğrenciler için öneminin diğer bilişsel ve psikomotor özelliklerden daha az olduğunu düşündükleri ortaya konmuştur.
References
Aljughaiman, A. M. & Ayoub, A.E.A. (2012). The effect of an enrichment program on deve- loping analytical, creative, and practical abilities of elementary gifted students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20(10), 1-22.
Clark, B. (1997). Growing up gifted. developing the potential of children at home and at school. (5th ed.). New Jersey: Merrill, an imprint of Prentice Hall.
Coleman, M. & Gallagher, J. (1992). Middle school survey report: Impact on gifted. North Carolina University, Chapel Hill. Gifted Education Policy Studies Program. Office of Educational Research and Improvement: Washington, DC.
Copland, M. & Knapp, M. (2006) Connecting leadership with learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Delcourt, M.A.B., Cornell, D.G., & Goldberg, M.D. (2007). Cognitive and affective learning outcomes of gifted elementary school students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(4), 359-381.
Demirel, Ş., & Sak, U. (2011). Yetenek hiyerarşisi: Üstün yetenek türlerinin toplumsal değer- leri üzerine bir araştırma. Türk Üstün Zekâ ve Eğitim Dergisi, 1(1),61-76.
Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N.E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fryand, F. & Hale, S. (1996). Processing speed, working memory, and fluid intelligence: evi- dence for a developmental cascade. The American Psychologist Society, 7, 237–241.
Hernández-Torrano, D., Prieto, M. D., Ferrándiz, C., Bermejo, R., & Sáinz, M. (2013). Characteristics leading teachers to nominate secondary students as gifted in Spain. Gifted Child Quarterly, 57, 181-196. doi:10.1177/0016986213490197.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: individual diffe- rences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99(1), 122–149.
Kail, R. (1991). Processing time declines exponentially during childhood and adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 27(2), 259–266.
Lewis, J. D., Cruzeiro, P. A., & Hall, C. A. (2007). Impact of two elementary school principals' leadership on gifted educational in their Buildings. Gifted Child Today, 30(2), 56-62.
Maker, C. & Nielson, A. (1996). Curriculum development and teaching strategies for gifted lear- ners. Austin, TX: PROED.
McCulloch, A. C. (2010). How stakeholders perceive gifted education: A study of beliefs held by sta- keholders in elementary gifted education programs. Unpublished doctorate dissertation, Capella University, Minneapolis, USA.
MEB (2013). Üstün yetenekli bireyler strateji ve uygulama planı 2013-2017. Özel Eğitim ve Reh- berlik Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara.
MEB (2015). Bilim ve sanat merkezleri yönergesi. Özel Eğitim ve Rehberlik Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara.
Özarslan, M. (2015). Proje paydaşlarının bilsem biyoloji projeleri hakkındaki düşünceleri ve bu proje- lerin üstün zekâlı ve yetenekli öğrencilerin biyoloji öğrenmeye yönelik motivasyonları ile bilim- sel tutumlarına etkisi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Balıkesir Üniversitesi, Balıkesir, Türkiye.
Rakow, S. (2007). All means all: Classrooms that work for advanced learners. National Midd- le School Association. Middle Ground, 11(1), 10-12.
Rimm, S. B. (2008). Why bright kids get poor grades. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.
Sak, U. (2010). Üstün zekâlılar: özellikleri tanılanmaları eğitimleri. Ankara: Maya Akademi. Silverman, L. K. (1993). Social development, leadership and gender issues. In L. K. Silverman(Ed.), Counseling the gifted and talented (s.291-329). Denver: Love Publishing Company.
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko E. L. (Eds.). (2002). The general factor of intelligence: How general is it? Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey, NJ: Mahwah.
Summak, M. S., & Çelik-Şahin, Ç. (2014). Türkiye’de bilim ve sanat merkezlerinde standartlarin belirlenmesi ile ilgili görüşlerin incelenmesi. Asian Journal of Instruction, 2(1), 1-15.
Super, C. M. (1981). Behavioural development in infancy, In R. H. Munroe, R. L. Munroe, and B. B. Whiting, (Eds.), Handbook of CrossCultural Human Development, New York, NY:Garland.
Şahin, F., & Levent, F. (2015). Examining the methods and strategies which classroom teachers use in the education of gifted students. The Online Journal of New Horizons in Education, 3(5), 73-82.
Tannenbaum, J. A. (1983). Gifted children psychological and educational perspectives. Macmillian College, New York.
Tanyeri, Y. (2003) Sanat ve spor. Atatürk Üniversitesi Güzel Sanatlar Fakültesi Dergisi, 4, 147-151.
Wang, H., Huang, I. & Hwang, G. (2014). Effects of an Integrated Scratch and Project-based Learning Approach on the Learning Achievements of Gifted Students in Computer Courses, Proceedings of 2014 IIAI 3rd International Conference on Advanced Applied Informatics, Kita-Kyushu, Japan: International Conference Center.
Wood, S., Portman, T., Cigrand, D., & Colangelo, N. (2010). School counselors' perceptions and experience with acceleration as a program option for gifted and talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54(3), 168-178.
Zeidner, M. & Schleyer, E.J. (1998). The Big-fish–little-pond effect for academic self-concept, test anxiety, and school grades in gifted children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 305–329.
