Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları

H. Gülhan ORHAN KARSAK, (Kırklareli Üniversitesi)
Burak GİDER (Muş Konukbekler İlkokulu)
Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi
6 3
Yıl: 2019 Cilt: 8 Sayı: 4 Sayfa Aralığı: 961 - 982 Metin Dili: Türkçe DOI: 10.30703/cije.543321 İndeks Tarihi: 18-02-2020

Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları

Öz:
Okul öncesi ve sınıf öğretmenlerin öğrenci yaşantılarına ilişkin empati kurabilmesi, problemlere özel yetenekli öğrencilerin gözünden bakabilmesi için bu öğrencilerin düşünme biçimlerini, problem çözme yöntemlerini, genel ve kişisel özelliklerini bilmeleri önem taşımaktadır. Bu amaçla okul öncesi ve sınıf öğretmenlerinin, özel yetenekli öğrencilerle ilgili metaforik algılarını ve bu öğrencilerin özelliklerine, tanılama ve eğitim süreçlerine ve sınıf ortamında yapılabilecek uygulamalara ilişkin görüşlerini belirlemek alana katkı sunmada oldukça önemlidir. Nitel olarak desenlenen bu olgubilim (fenomenoloji) çalışmasına farklı kurumlarda görev yapan 6 sınıf öğretmeni ve 11 okul öncesi öğretmeni olmak üzere toplam 17 öğretmen katılmıştır. Araştırmacının biri tarafından özel yetenekli kavramı kapsamında, öğretmenlerin “üstün zekalı (gifted) öğrenci” ve “üstün yetenekli (talented) öğrenci” kavramlarına ilişkin metaforik algıları ve bu öğrencilerin özellikleri, tanılanması ve eğitimleri hakkındaki görüşleri 50 dakika süre tanınarak bireysel ve yazılı olarak alınmıştır. Görüşme dökümleri, Nvivo 8.1 aracılığıyla kategoriler ve temalar oluşturularak içerik analizi tekniğiyle çözümlenmiştir. Sonuçlardan bazıları şöyledir. Öğretmenler özel yetenekli öğrencilerin bilişsel, duyuşsal ve psikomotor alanda pek çok özelliğe sahip olduklarını belirtmişlerdir. Öğrencilerin zeka ve yetenek alanlarını dikkate alarak düzenlenecek hizmet içi öğretmen eğitimlerine ve öğretim etkinliklerine gereksinim vardır. Katılımcı öğretmenler “üstün zekalı öğrenci” kavramına ilişkin yedi farklı kategoride on metafor ve “üstün yetenekli öğrenci” kavramına ilişkin altı farklı kategoride yine on metafor üretmişlerdir.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları Eğitim, Özel

Metaphorical Perceptions and Views of Teachers About Gifted and Talented Students and Their Education

Öz:
It is important for preschool and primary school teachers to be able to empathize on students’ life and to look at problems in the eyes of gifted and talented students and to know their thinking styles, problem solving methods, general and personal characteristics. For this purpose, it is very important to contribute to the field by, putting forth preschool and primary school teachers’ metaphorical perceptions about gifted and talented students and determining the teachers’ views about the characteristics of these pupils, their diagnosis and education processes, and the activities in the classroom environment that they can do. A total of 17 teachers, including 6 classroom teachers and 11 preschool teachers who work at different institutions, participated in this qualitative study, phenomenology. Metaphorical perceptions of teachers' about gifted and talented concepts and their views on the characteristics, diagnosis and education of these students were taken individually by giving 50 minutes for each other in writing. Views are analyzed by using content analysis technique and categories and themes created via Nvivo 8.1. Some conclusions are as follows. Teachers stated that gifted and talented students have many different features in cognitive, affective and psychomotor field. In-service teacher trainings and instruction activities which should be arranged by taking into consideration the students' intelligence and ability areas, are necessities. Participant teachers produced ten metaphors in seven different categories related to gifted students and a total of ten metaphors in six different categories related to talented students.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları Eğitim, Özel
Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Achter, J. A., Benbow, C. P. & Lubinski, D. (1997). Rethinking multipotentiality among the intellectually gifted: A critical review and recommendations. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41(1):5–15. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F001698629704100102
  • Akar, I., & Uluman, M. (2013). Classroom teachers' ability to nominate gifted students. Journal of Gifted Education Research, 1(3), 199-212.
  • Alemdar, M. (2009). Comparison of parent, teacher and expert opinions in identifying gifted children in early childhood (Unpublished master's thesis). Gazi University, Ankara.
  • Alkan, A. (2015). Investigation of Teachers' Studies on Determining the Gifted Students. Journal of Gifted Education Research, 3(1), 54-65.
  • Altunisik, R., Coskun, R., Bayraktaroglu, S., & Yildirim, E. (2010). Research methods in social sciences. Practiced SPSS. Sakarya: Sakarya Publishing.
  • Al-zoubi, S. M. (2014). Effects of enrichment programs on the academic achievement of gifted and talented students. Journal for the Education of the Young Scientist and Giftedness, 2(2), 22-27. Doi: 10.17478/JEYSG.201429018
  • Baltaci, A. (2018). A conceptual study on sampling methods and sample volume problem in qualitative research. Bitlis Eren University Journal of Institute of Social Sciences. , 7(1), 231-274.
  • Battles, B. (2007). Teachers’ perceptions of the federal definition of gifted and talented. Kentucky Teacher Education. Paper 3. http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/kte/3.
  • Bildiren, A. (2018). The interest issues of gifted children. World Journal of Education, 8(1), 17-26. Doi:10.5430/wje.v8n1p17
  • Celikten, Y. (2017). Gifted children and BILSEM. Turkish Journal of Educational Studies, 4 (3), 87-104.
  • Cetin, A. & Dogan, A. (2018). The problems of Mathematics teachers who work in Science and Art Centers. Ankara University Faculty of Educational Sciences Special Education Journal, 4, 615-641. Doi: 10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.370355
  • Cetin, S., Sahin, C., Mertol, H., Arcagok, S. & Girgin, D. (2017). Entrepreneurship capabilities of students in social studies: Comparison of Science and Art Center and primary school students. Turkish Journal of Gifted and Education, 7(2), 110-125.
  • Chan, D. W. (2001). Characteristics and competencies of teachers of gifted learners: The Hong Kong teacher perspective. Roeper Review. 23(4), 197-202. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190109554098
  • Christensen-Needham, V. (2010). Primary teachers’ perceptions of the social and emotional aspects of gifted and talented education. A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of master of Teaching and Learning in the university of Canterbury, New Zealand.
  • Cooper, P. M. (2013) Parents' perceptions of how they serve the social and emotional needs of their intellectually identified gifted children. Texas Wesleyan University, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 3606132.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2015). Qualitative research method: Research and research design according to five approaches, (tra.. edit.) M. Butun ve S. B. Demir. Ankara: Ani publishing.
  • Davis, G. A. Rimm, S. B. (2003). Education of the gifted and talented. Boston, MA: Allyn ve Bacon.
  • Duran, A. & Daglioglu, H. E. (2017). The metaphoric perceptions of preschool teacher candidates regarding gifted children. GEFAD / GUJGEF 37(3), 855 – 881.
  • Eileen, S. (2018). The identifation of gifted children in Australia: The importance of policy. TalentEd, 30(1), 1-16.
  • Eraslan-Capan, B. (2010). Metaphorical perceptions of prospective teachers about gifted students. International Journal of Social Research, 3(12), 140-154.
  • Eren, F. Cete, A. O. Avcil, S. Baykara, B. (2018). Emotional and Behavioral Characteristics of Gifted Children and Their Families. Neuropsychiatry Archive, June, 55(2), 105-112.
  • Fard, E. K. Keelor, J. L. Bagheban, A. A. Keith, R. W. (2016). Comparison of the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) and Digit Test among typically achieving and gifted students. Iranian Journal of Child Neurology, 10 (2), 26-37.
  • Gagne, F. (1985). Giftedness and talent: Reexamining a reexamination of the definitions. Gifted Child Quarterly. 29(3), 103-112. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698628502900302.
  • Gallagher, J. J. (2015). Peer acceptance of highly gifted children in elementary school. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 38(1), 51-57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353214565549.
  • Gokdere, M. & Ayvaci, H. S. (2004). Determination of primary teacher’s knowledge level about giftedness concept. The Journal of Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Education, 18, 17–26.
  • Green, S. A. (2016). Teacher Perceptions Of Leadership Potential Of Gifted And Talented Students. Unpublished Master Thesis. Education Degree Programme, Morgan State University, The United States.
  • Hemphill, A. N. (2009). How teacher participation in the identification process impacts the under representation of minority students in gifted programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Southern California University, California.
  • Inan, H. Z., Bayindir, N. & Demir, S. (2009). Awareness level of teachers about the charecteristics of gifted childiren, Australian Journal of Basic Applied Sciences, 3(3), 2519-2527.
  • Kadioglu-Ates, H. (2018). Gifted children metaphor from the perspective of teachers and parents. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 6(2), 30-42. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.17478/JEGYS.2018.76.
  • Karabey, B. Yurumezoglu, K. (2015). A review for creativity and giftedness with perspective of intelligence theories. Dokuz Eylul University Journal of Buca Education Faculty, 40, 86-106.
  • Karatas, Y. & Saricam, H. (2016). The relationship between moral maturity and sense and behaviors of responsibility in gifted children. Global Journal of Psychology Research, 6(1):10–19. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjpr.v6i1.491
  • Kazu, I. Y. & Senol, C. (2012). Views of teachers about gifted curriculum (Case of Science andArt Center). E--International Education Research Journal, 3(2), 13-35.
  • Koc, I. (2015). Opinions of special gifted and talented students continuing to Science and Arts Center on communication skills. . Journal of Gifted Education Research, 3(1), 39-53.
  • Koksal, M. S. Gogsu, D. & Kilic, O. (2017). Gifted and talented development of properties in Turkey must be provided in terms of what? A stakeholder opinion study. Turkish Journal of Gifted and Education, 7(1), 2-18.
  • Kunt, K. Tortop, H. S. (2013). The metaphoric perceptions of gifted students about Science and Art Centers in Turkey. Journal of Gifted Education Research, 1(2), 117-127.
  • Kurnaz, A. (2013). Evaluation of Science and Art Centers in the twentieth year depending on the reports and directors' views. Journal of Gifted Education Research, 2(1), 1-22.
  • Kutlu-Abu, N. Akkanat, C. & Gokdere, M. (2017). Teachers' views on the education of gifted students in normal classes. Turkish Journal of Gifted and Education, 7(2), 87-109.
  • Laine, S. Kuusisto, E. Tirri, K. (2016). Finnish teachers’conceptions of giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 39(2), 151-167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353216640936
  • Leana-Tascilar, M. Z. (2016). An experimental study on planning capabilities of gifted and normal students. Turkish Journal of Gifted and Education, 6(2), 55-70.
  • Lee, L. (1999). Teachers’ conceptions of gifted and talented young children. High Ability Studies, 10(2), 183-196. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359813990100205.
  • Lu, J. Li, D. Stevens, C. Ye, R. (2017). Comparisons and analyses of gifted students’ characteristics and learning methods. Gifted Education International, 33(1), 45-61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429414565160.
  • Mastropieri, M., & Scruggs, T. (2000). The inclusive classroom: Strategies for effective Instruction. Colombus. OH: Merrill.
  • Mayorova, I. M. Fedorenko, M. V., Hakki, A. M., Salakhov, R. F. (2018). Personality characteristics of gifted students of creative specialty. Revista Publicando, 5(17), 322-329.
  • Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook. Qualitative data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
  • Muratori, M. C. & Smith, C. K. (2015). Guiding the talent and career development of the gifted individual. Journal of Counseling & Development, 93(2), 173–182. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556- 6676.2015.00193.x.
  • Nar, B. & Tortop, H. S. (2017). Resource room applications for gifted students in Turkey: Problems and implications. Istanbul Aydin University Education Faculty Journal, 3(1), 85-99.
  • Neumeister, K. L. S. Adams, C. M. Pierce, R. L. Cassady, J. C. Dixon, F. A. (2007). Fourth-grade teachers’ perceptions of giftedness: Implications for identifying and serving diverse gifted students. Journal For The Education For The Gifted, 30(4), 479-499.
  • Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2018). The Role of the Family in Talent Development. In Pfeiffer, S. (Ed.). Handbook of Giftedness in Children Psychoeducational Theory, Research, and Best Practices. Springer, Cham.
  • Olthouse, J. (2014). How do preservice teachers conceptualize giftedness? A metaphor analysis. Rooper Review, 36(2), 122-132. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2014.884200.
  • Ozcan, D. (2017). Career decision-making of the gifted and talented. South African Journal of Education, 37(4), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v37n4a1521.
  • Ozcelik, A. Akgunduz, D. Evaluation of gifted/talented students’ out-of-school STEM education. Trakya University Journal of Education Faculty, 8(2), 334-351.
  • Ozdemir, M. (2010). Qualitative data analysis: A study of the methodology problem in the social sciences. Eskisehir Osmangazi University Journal of Social Sciences, 1(11), 323-343.
  • Ozenç, M. & Ozenç, E. G. (2013). The multidimensional examination of master-doctorial dissertations made in Turkey about gifted and talented students. Turkey Social Research Journal, 171, 13-28.
  • Ozsoy, Y. (2014). Science and Art Center students, teachers and parents metaphors on the concept of gifted students. Journal of Gifted Education Research, 2(1), 74-88.
  • Peterson, J. S. (2015). School counselors and gifted kids: Respecting both cognitive and affective. Journal of Counseling and Development, 93(2), 153–162. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.2015.00191.x
  • Renzulli, J. S. (2005). Applying gifted education pedagogy to total talent development for all students, Theory Into Practice, 44(2), 80-89.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (2011). What makes giftedness?: Reexamining a definition. PDK International, 92(8), 81-88. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171109200821.
  • Resmi Gazete. MEB Özel Eğitim Hizmetleri Yönetmeliği 7 Temmuz 2018. http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2018/07/20180707-8.htm 7.07.2019
  • Robins, J. & Chandler, K. (2013). What works: 25 years of curriculum development and research. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
  • Roeper, A., & Silverman, L. K. (2009). Giftedness and moral promise. In Morality, ethics, and gifted minds (pp. 251-264). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-89368-6_19
  • Sahin, F. (2012).The effectiveness of the training program to improve the level of knowledge of the class teachers about the gifted students and their characteristics (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ankara University, Ankara.
  • Sahin, F. Cetinkaya, C. (2015). Investigation of the effectiveness and efficiency of classroom teachers in the identification of the gifted. Turkish Journal of Gifted and Education, 5(2), 133-146.
  • Sahin, F., and Kargin, T. (2013). The effect of a teacher's education on the level of kowledge of teachers about the identification of gifted students. Ankara University Faculty of Educational Sciences Special Education Journal, 14(2), 1-13.
  • Sak, U. Ayas, M. B. Sezerel, B. B. Opengin, E. Ozdemir, N. N. And Demirel-Gurbuz, S. (2015). A Critical evaluation of the gifted education in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Gifted and Education, 5(2), 110-132.
  • Saranli, A. G. Er, S. Deniz, K. Z. (2017). An analysis of language development in gifted preschool children. Education for Life, 31(1), 1-20. Doi: 10.15390/EB.2017.7062
  • Sternberg, R. J. (2003). A broad view of intelligence: The theory of successful intelligence. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 55(3), 139-154.
  • Tasdemir, O. M. & Ergul, C. (2015). The giftedness profile analysis based on WISC-R in Ankara city sample. Ankara University Faculty of Educational Sciences Special Education Journal, 16(3), 271-292.
  • Tavsancil, E. and Aslan, E. (2001). Content analysis and application examples. İstanbul: Epsilon Publishing.
  • Turalbayeva, A. T. Sultanbek, M. Utyupova, C. E. Aidarov, B. Zh., Uaidullakyzy, E. Zhumash, Zh. Uzunboylu, H. (2017). The general preparation of the training of elementary school and the family and the education of gifted children school in cooperation principles. International Journal of Sciences and Research, 73(4), 239-251.
  • Unal, F. and Er, H. (2015). Assessment of the opinions of gifted students about social studies courses. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty, 16(1), 165-182.
  • Unlu, Z. K. and Dokme, İ. Gifted children’ images about STEM’s E. Trakya University Journal of Education Faculty, 7(1), 196-204.
  • Winebrenner, S. (2000). The trials and tribulations of being gifted: Has gifted education changed over the years? Understanding Our Gifted, 12(4), 10-12.
  • Worrell, F. C. Subotnik, R. F. Olszewski-Kubilius, P. Dixson, D. D. (2019). Gifted students. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 551-576.
  • Yildirim, A. & Simsek, H. (2008). Qualitative research methods in the social science. Ankara: Seckin Publishing.
  • Zeidner, M. (2018). Emotional Intelligence (EI) and the gifted. In: Pfeiffer S. (eds) Handbook of Giftedness in Children. Springer, Cham.
APA ORHAN KARSAK H, GİDER B (2019). Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları. , 961 - 982. 10.30703/cije.543321
Chicago ORHAN KARSAK H. Gülhan,GİDER Burak Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları. (2019): 961 - 982. 10.30703/cije.543321
MLA ORHAN KARSAK H. Gülhan,GİDER Burak Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları. , 2019, ss.961 - 982. 10.30703/cije.543321
AMA ORHAN KARSAK H,GİDER B Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları. . 2019; 961 - 982. 10.30703/cije.543321
Vancouver ORHAN KARSAK H,GİDER B Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları. . 2019; 961 - 982. 10.30703/cije.543321
IEEE ORHAN KARSAK H,GİDER B "Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları." , ss.961 - 982, 2019. 10.30703/cije.543321
ISNAD ORHAN KARSAK, H. Gülhan - GİDER, Burak. "Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları". (2019), 961-982. https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.543321
APA ORHAN KARSAK H, GİDER B (2019). Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları. Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi, 8(4), 961 - 982. 10.30703/cije.543321
Chicago ORHAN KARSAK H. Gülhan,GİDER Burak Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları. Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi 8, no.4 (2019): 961 - 982. 10.30703/cije.543321
MLA ORHAN KARSAK H. Gülhan,GİDER Burak Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları. Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi, vol.8, no.4, 2019, ss.961 - 982. 10.30703/cije.543321
AMA ORHAN KARSAK H,GİDER B Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları. Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi. 2019; 8(4): 961 - 982. 10.30703/cije.543321
Vancouver ORHAN KARSAK H,GİDER B Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları. Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi. 2019; 8(4): 961 - 982. 10.30703/cije.543321
IEEE ORHAN KARSAK H,GİDER B "Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları." Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi, 8, ss.961 - 982, 2019. 10.30703/cije.543321
ISNAD ORHAN KARSAK, H. Gülhan - GİDER, Burak. "Öğretmenlerin Özel Yetenekli Öğrenciler ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Metaforik Algıları". Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi 8/4 (2019), 961-982. https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.543321
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
16-05-2024 13:58

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları