Özel Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Yer Aldığı Matematik Sınıflarında Öğretmenlerin Bakış Açısından Zararlı Değerler

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, ortaokul matematik öğretmenlerinin özel yetenekli öğrencilerin yer aldığı sınıflardaki deneyimledikleri zararlı değerleri tespit etmektir. Yorumlayıcı fenomenolojik desende tasarlanan araştırmanın katılımcıları iki ortaokul matematik öğretmenidir. Amaçlı örnekleme metoduna göre belirlenen katılımcılar özel yetenekli öğrencilerin yer aldığı kaynaştırma sınıflarında ders verme tecrübelerine sahip olan öğretmenlerdir. Sınıf video kayıtlarıyla zenginleştirilmiş grup görüşmeleriyle elde edilen veriler yorumlayıcı fenomenolojik analiz metoduyla analiz edilmiştir. Bulgularda, değerlerin pozitif kültürel rollerine dair beklentilerinin aksine risk teşkil eden yansımaları belirlenmiştir. Matematik öğretmenlerinin, özel yetenekli ve diğer öğrencilerin sahip olduğu değerler ve kurumsal değerler bağlamında kategoriler elde edilmiştir. Öğretmenlerin sahip olduğu zararlı değerler; kontrol, matematiksel akıl yürütme, öğrenci beklentilerini dikkate alma, eşitlik, ilişkilendirme (günlük hayat), öğretmen beklentileri ve gruba özgü (öğretim yaklaşımı) olarak belirlenmiştir. Özel yetenekli öğrencilerin sahip olduğu zararlı değerler; uygulama, aşinalık, ezberleme, dönüt ve özgüven olarak belirlenmiştir. Diğer öğrencilerin sahip olduğu zararlı değerler; uygulama, aşinalık, ezberleme, somutlaştırma (öğrenme yaklaşımı) olarak belirlenmiştir. Kurumsal değerlerde zararlı değerler; demokrasi ve kaynaştırma eğitimi (öğretim yaklaşımı). Değerlerin kaynaklarındaki çeşitlilik ve bundan doğan değerlerin çatışmaları pozitif değerlerin istenmeyen yansımalarını ortaya çıkarmıştır. Dolayısıyla, değer uyumuna, öğretmenlerin değerleri yönetim becerilerine ve kurumsal değerlerin uygulamadaki yansımalarına ilişkin risk teşkil eden sonuçlar elde edilmiştir. Değerlerin zararlı sonuçlarının ortaya konulmasıyla öğretmenlere, kurumlara ve ileriki araştırmalara çarpıcı öneriler sunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• zararlı değerler
• matematik sınıfları
• ortaokul matematik öğretmenleri
• özel yetenekli öğrenciler

Harmful Values from the Lens of Teachers in Mathematics Classrooms with Gifted Student

Abstract

This study aims to identify the harmful values experienced by secondary school mathematics teachers in classrooms with gifted students. The participants in the study, which was designed as an interpretative phenomenological design, were two secondary school mathematics teachers. The participants selected using purposive sampling had teaching experiences in inclusive classrooms with gifted students. The data obtained through group interviews, enriched with classroom video recordings, were analyzed by the interpretative phenomenological analysis method. The findings revealed harmful reflections of values contrary to the expectations concerning their positive cultural role. Categories were obtained in the context of mathematics teachers’, gifted students’ and pupils’ values and institutional values. Teachers’ harmful values are control, mathematical reasoning, considering students’ expectations, equality, relevance (daily life), teacher expectations and esoteric (teaching approach). Gifted students’ harmful values are practice, familiarity, memorization, feedback and overconfidence. Other students’ harmful values are practice, familiarity, memorization and concretization (learning approach). The institutional values are democracy and inclusive education (teaching approach). The diversity in the sources of values and the resulting conflicts of values have led to undesirable reflections of positive values. Consequently, harmful results were experienced concerning the values alignment, the teachers’ skill to manage values and the reflection of institutional values in practice. By revealing the harmful consequences of values, striking implications for teachers, institutions and future research are presented.

Keywords

• harmful values
• mathematics classrooms
• middle school mathematics teachers
• gifted students

References

1. Aktaş, F. N. (2023a). Özel yetenekli bir öğrencinin kaynaştırma eğitiminde matematik sınıflarındaki değerleri hizalama stratejileri. Edutech Research Dergisi, 1(1), 14-25.
2. Aktaş, F. N. (2023b). Özel yetenekli öğrencilerin yer aldığı matematik sınıfında değerlerin hizalanması. Proceeding in International Education Congress (pp.100-108), 20-23 September, Ankara, Türkiye.
3. Aktaş, F. N. (2024a). Designing a professional development model for values alignment strategies in inclusive mathematics instruction. In Y., Dede, G., Marschall, P., Clarkson (Eds.), Values and valuing in mathematics education (pp. 101-124). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-9454-0_6
4. Aktaş, F. N. (2024b). The harmful values framing mathematical concept definitions. Proceeding in 3rd International Conference on Frontiers in Academic Research (pp. 94-97), 15-16 June, Konya, Türkiye. All Sciences Academy.
5. Aktaş, F. N., & Dede, Y. (2022). Gifted students’ mathematics educational and socio-cultural values in the decision-making process through STEM tasks. In T. Barkatsas (Ed.), Educating gifted, talented, creative and dissimilar learners (pp. 36-63). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004532571_003
6. Aktaş, F. N., & Dede, Y. (2023). Re-imagining mathematics teacher education for 21st century skills in the context of harmful mathematics educational values. In T. Barkatsas, P., McLaughlin, & W., Goff (Eds.), Reimagining education for the second quarter of the 21st century and beyond (pp. 40-60). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004688490_003
7. Aktaş, F. N., Akyıldız, P., & Dede, Y. (2023). Students’ mathematics educational values at religious vocational middle schools: A cross-sectional study. Education 3-13, 51(3), 480-492. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2021.1981421
8. Aktaş, F. N., Yakıcı-Topbas, E. S., & Dede, Y. (2019). The elementary mathematics teacher’s values underlying teacher noticing: The context of polygons. In P. Clarkson, W. T. Seah, & J. S. Pang (Eds.), Values and valuing in mathematics education: Scanning and scoping the territory (pp. 209–222). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16892-6_15

9. Akyıldız, P., Aktaş, F. N., Dede, Y., & Hacıömeroğlu, G. (2021). Mathematics teachers’ values about teaching mathematics. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68, 100954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100954
10. Avcu, Y. E., & Yaman, Y. (2022). Effectiveness of the differentiated instructional design for value education of gifted: A mixed study. Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity, 9(1), 1-23.
11. Baldvinsdottir, G. (2022). The language game of values and un-values. Journal of Pragmatic Constructivism, 12(1), 180-186.
12. Barkatsas, A., & Seah, W. (2015). Learners’ preferred mathematical task types: The values perspective. In A. Bishop, H. Tan, & T. Barkatsas (Eds.), Diversity in mathematics education: Towards inclusive practices (pp. 63-79). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05978-5_4
13. Biggerstaff, D., & Thompson, A. R. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA): A qualitative methodology of choice in healthcare research. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 5(3), 214-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780880802314304
14. Bishop, A. (1988). Mathematics enculturation. Kluwer.
15. Bishop, A. J. (1996). How should mathematics teaching in modern societies relate to cultural values: Some preliminary questions. In 7th Southeast Asian Conference on Mathematics Education (vol. 32, June 3–7).
16. Bishop, A. J. (2001). Educating student teachers about values in mathematics education. In F.-L. Lin & T. J. Cooney (Eds.), Making sense of mathematics teacher education (pp. 233–246). Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0828-0_11
17. Bishop, A., & Kalegeropoulos, P. (2015). (Dis)engagement and exclusion in mathematics classrooms—Values, labelling and stereotyping. In A. Bishop, H. Tan, & T. N. Barkatsas (Eds.), Diversity in mathematics education: Towards inclusive practices (pp. 193–218). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
18. Bishop, A. J., Clarkson, P., Fitzsimons, G., & Seah, W. T. (2000). Why study values in mathematics teaching: Contextu-alising the VAMP project? In W. S. Horng & F.-L. Lin (Eds.), Proceedings of the HPM 2000 conference on history in mathematics education (Vol. 2, pp. 147–154). Taipei, Taiwan: National Taiwan Normal University.https://doi.org/www.education.monash.edu.au/research/groups/smte/projects/vamp/hpm2000a.pdf
19. Ceríaco, L. M. (2012). Human attitudes towards herpetofauna: The influence of folklore and negative values on the conservation of amphibians and reptiles in Portugal. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 8(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-8-8
20. Chia, H. M., & Zhang, Q. (2024). Towards a reconceptualisation of values research in mathematics education: A systematic review. In Y., Dede, G., Marschall, P., Clarkson (Eds.), Values and valuing in mathematics education (pp. 37-56). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-9454-0_3
21. Clarkson, P. (2024). Mystery: One of six mathematics values. In Y., Dede, G., Marschall, & P., Clarkson (Eds.), Values and valuing in mathematics education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-9454-0_2
22. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson.
23. Davis, E., Seah, W., Howard, N., & Wilmot, E. (2021). The attributes of mathematics learning which Ghanaian senior high school students value. Journal of Global Education and Research, 5(1), 1-14. https://www.doi.org/10.5038/2577-509X.5.1.1096
24. Dede, Y., & Barkatsas, T. (2019). Developing a questionnaire to evaluate Turkish students’ mathematics values and preferences. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 12(4), 1142-1163. https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.529092
25. de Visser, R. O., & Smith, J. A. (2007). Alcohol consumption and masculine identity among young men. Psychology & Health, 22(5), 595–614. https://doi.org/10.1080/14768320600941772
26. Ernest, P. (2016) Values and mathematics: Overt and covert. Culture and Dialogue, 4(1), 48–82. doi:10.1163/24683949-12340004
27. Fan, L. (2021). Exploring issues about values in mathematics education. ECNU Review of Education, 4(2), 388-395. https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311211016002
28. Faragher, R., Hill, J., Clarke, B. (2016). Inclusive Practices in Mathematics Education. In K. Makar, S. Dole, J. Visnovska, M. Goos, A. Bennison, & K. Fry (Eds.) Research in mathematics education in Australasia 2012-2015. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1419-2_7
29. Greening, N. (2019). Phenomenological research methodology. Scientific Research Journal, VII(V), 88-92.
30. Hermessi, T. (2017). Teacher perception of cultural difference in L2 materials: Is filtering culture the right approach?. Tesl-Ej, 21(2), 1-19.
31. Hill, J. L., Kern, M. L., Seah, W. T., & van Driel, J. (2021). Feeling good and functioning well in mathematics education: Exploring students’ conceptions of mathematical well-being and values. ECNU Review of Education, 4(2), 349-375. http/doi.org/10.1177/2096531120928084
32. Karp, A. (2010). Teachers of the mathematically gifted tell about themselves and their profession. Roeper Review, 32(4), 272-280. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2010.485306
33. Laverty, S. M. (2003). Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: A comparison of historical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(3), 21-35.
34. McClain, M. C., & Pfeiffer, S. (2012). Identification of gifted students in the United States today: A look at state definitions, policies, and practices. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 28(1), 59-88.
35. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
36. Milgram, R., & Hong, E. (2009). Talent loss in mathematics: Causes and solutions. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp. 149–163). Sense Publishers.
37. Mills, C. J. (2003). Characteristics of effective teachers of gifted students: Teacher background and personality styles of students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(4), 272-281. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620304700404
38. Ministry of National Education. (2024). Common text of curricula. Author.
39. National Council of the Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM] (2000). Principles standards and for school mathematics. Author.
40. Oxley, L. (2016). An examination of interpretative phenomenological analysis. Educational and Child Psychology, 33(3), 55-62. https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsecp.2016.33.3.55
41. Palmer, M., Larkin, M., de Visser, R. & Fadden, G. (2010). Developing an interpretative phenomenological approach to focus group data. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 7(2), 99-121. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780880802513194
42. Pang, J., & Seah, W. T. (2021). Excellent mathematical performance despite “negative” affect of students in Korea: The values perspective. ECNU Review of Education, 4(2), 285-306. https://doi.org/10.1177/2096531120930726
43. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage.
44. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. The Free Press.
45. Seah, W. T. (2008). Valuing values in mathematics education. In Clarkson, P., Presmeg, N. (Eds), Critical issues in mathematics education: Major contributions of Alan Bishop (pp. 239-253). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09673-5_17
46. Seah, W. T. (2016). Values in the mathematics classroom: Supporting cognitive and affective pedagogical ideas. Pedagogical Research, 1(2), 53. http://dx.doi.org/10.20897/lectito.201653
47. Seah, W. T. (2019). Values in mathematics education: Its conative nature, and how it can be developed. Research in Mathematical Education, 22(2), 99-121. http://doi.org/10.7468/jksmed.2019.22.2.99
48. Seah, W. T., & Bishop, A. J. (2000). Values in mathematics textbooks: A view through two Australasian regions. Paper presented at the 81st annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
49. Seah, W. T., & Andersson, A. (2015). Valuing diversity in mathematics pedagogy through the volitional nature and alignment of values. In A. Bishop, H. Tan, & T. N. Barkatsas (Eds.), Diversity in mathematics education: Towards inclusive practices (pp. 167–183). Springer.
50. Seah, W. T., & Wong, N. Y. (2012). What students value in effective mathematics learning: A ‘Third Wave Project’research study. ZDM, 44, 33-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0391-4
51. Smith, J. A. (2004). Reflecting on the development of interpretative phenomenological analysis and its con tribution to qualitative research in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 1(1), 39–54.
52. Smith, J. A., & Osborn, M. (2004). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In G. M. Breakwell (Ed.), Doing social psychology research (pp. 229–254). British Psychological Society. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470776278.ch10
53. Smith, J.A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory method and research. Sage.
54. Tirri, K. (Ed.). (2007). Values and foundations in gifted education. Peter Lang.
55. Zhang, Q. (2019). Values in mathematics learning: Perspectives of Chinese mainland primary and secondary students. In P., Clarkson, W. T., Seah, J., Pang (Eds.), Values and valuing in mathematics education: Scanning and scoping the territory, 185-196. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16892-6_13