ÜYÜKEP Programının Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Öz-düzenleme Becerilerini Geliştirmeye Etkisi

Year 2016, Volume: 1 Issue: 2, 81 - 93, 01.12.2016

Hasan Said Tortop Merve Topal

Abstract

Üstün yetenekli eğitiminin başarısı, üstün yetenekli bireylerin özelliklerini üstün yetenekli öğrencilerde oluşturucu şekilde olursa artar. Bu ise üstün yetenekli bireyler hangi becerilerle donanımlı olduğunun anlaşılması ve bu becerilerin eğitiminin üstün yetenekli eğitimine aktarılmasıyla mümkündür. Üstün Yetenekliler Üniversite Köprüsü Eğitim Programı ÜYÜKEP akademik alanda üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin yetiştirilmesi için ortaya konmuş bir programdır. ÜYÜKEP müfredat bileşenleri arasında öz-düzenleme becerileri bulunmaktadır. Öz-düzenleme becerileri sadece üstün yetenekli bilim insanlarının yetişmesinde değil tüm yetenek alanlarında bireylerin edinmeleri gereken becerilerdir. Bu çalışmada ÜYÜKEP’in birinci aşamasındaki 3 ve 4. sınıf düzeyindeki 19 öğrencinin öz-düzenleme becerilerindeki değişimin incelenmesi yapılmıştır. Tek gruplu öntest-sontest deneysel desen olarak gerçekleştirilen araştırma, 2013-2014 öğretim yılı bahar döneminde 12 haftalık sürede gerçekleştirilmiştir. Uygulama sonucunda ÜYÜKEP’e devam eden üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin öz-düzenleme becerilerinde artış görülmüştür. Sonuç olarak üstün yetenekli öğrencilerde öz-düzenleme becerilerini geliştirmeye yönelik oluşturulan bu programın etkili olduğu söylenebilir

Keywords

Öz-düzenleme becerileri, üstün yetenekli öğrenciler, ÜYÜKEP

ÜYÜKEP Programının Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Öz-düzenleme Becerilerini Geliştirmeye Etkisi

Abstract

The success of gifted education increases if the structures of giftedness phenomenon are formed especially for the gifted students. Gifted children should no longer be educated to bear the burden of knowledge but they should be educated to contribute to the emergence of competence. Education Program for Gifted Students Bridge with University EPGBU is a program designed to train the gifted students in the academic field. EPGBU has self-regulation skills among the curriculum components. Self-regulation skills are the skills that individuals must acquire in all fields of competence, not just in the education of the gifted scientists. In this study, the changes in the self-regulation skills of the 19 third and fourth grade students in the first step of EPGBU were examined. The research was carried out as a single group pretest-posttest experimental design during the 12-week period in the spring semester of 2013-2014 academic year. As a result of the implementation, self-regulation skills of the gifted students who continued the EPGBU were increased. Consequently, it can be said that this program, which is designed to improve self-regulation skills of the gifted students, is effective

Keywords

Self-regulation skills, gifted students, EPGBU

References

• Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. v.s. Ramachaudran (Ed) Encyclopedia of human behavior (ss. 71–81) içinde, New York: Academic Press.
• Boekeerts, M., Pintrich, P. R. & Zeidner, M. (2000). Handbook of Self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E.,K., Akgün, Ö.,E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2011). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri, 8. baskı, Ankara: PegemA yayıncılık.
• Cheng, E. C. K. (2011). The role of self-regulated learning in enhancing learning performance. The International Journal of Research and Review, 6(1), 1–16.
• Covington, M. V., & Dray, E. (2002). The developmental course of achievement motivation: A need-based approach. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Ed.), Development of achievement motivation (ss. 33–56). San Francisco, CA: Elsevier Science.
• Cramond, B., Matthews-Morgan, J., Bandalos, D., & Zuo, L. (2005). A report on the 40-year follow-up of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Alive and well in the new millennium. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 283–291.
• Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
• Cross, T. L. (2011). On the social and emotional lives of gifted children (4.Baskı). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1985). Emergent motivation and the evolution of self: Motivation in adulthood. In D. Kleiber & M. H. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Cilt. 4, ss. 93– 119). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
• Curby, T. W., Rudasill, K. M., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Konold, T. R. (2008). The role of social competence in predicting gifted enrollment. Psychology in the Schools, 45, 729–744.
• Davis, G.A, & Rimm, S.B. (1998). Education of the gifted and talented. (4.Baskı). USA: Allyn & Bacon. Chapter 15 (ss.342-362).
• Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363–406.
• Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive development inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911.
• Gagne, F. (2004). Transforming gifts to talent: The DGMT as a developmental model. High Ability Studies, 15, 199-147.
• Heller, K. A. (1999). Individual (learning and motivational) needs versus instructional conditions of gifted education. High Ability Studies, 10(1), 9–21.
• Horowitz, F. D., Subotnik, R. F., & Matthews, D. J. (Eds.). (2009). The development of giftedness and talent across the life span. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Howard, R. W. (2008). Linking extreme precocity and adult eminence: A study of eight prodigies at international chess. High Ability Studies, 19, 117–130.
• Karnes, M. B., & Johnson, L. J. (1991). Gifted handicapped. In Colangelo, N., & Davis, G. (Eds). Handbook of gifted education. Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.
• Kover, D. J., & Worrell, F. C. (2010). The influence of instrumentality beliefs on achievement motivation: A study of high achieving adolescents. Journal of Advanced Academics, 21, 470–498.
• Mayer, R. E. (2005). The scientific study of giftedness. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Ed.), Conceptions of giftedness (2.Baskı, ss. 437–447). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Moltzen, R., Riley, T. & McAlpine, D. (2000). Gifted and talented students: Meeting their needs in New Zealand schools. Wellington: Learning Media Limited.
• Neber H., & Schommer-Aikins, M. (2002). Self-regulated Science Learning with Highly Gifted Students: the role of cognitive, motivational, epistemological, and environmental variables. High Ability Studies, 13(1), 59-74.
• Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16 (4), 385-407.
• Plucker, A. J. (1999). Is the proof in the pudding? Reanalyses of Torrance’s (1958 to present) longitudinal data. Creativity Research Journal, 12(2), 103-114.
• Reis, S. (1998). Underachieving for some. Dropping out with dignity for others. Communicator, 29(1), 19-24.
• Renzulli, J. S. (1977). The Enrichment Triad Model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
• Renzulli, J. S. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (ss. 53-92). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Rimm, S.B. (2003). Underachievement: A national epidemic: In N. Colangelo and G.A. Davis (Eds), Handbook of Gifted Education. New York: Allyn and Bacon.
• Risemberg, R., & Zimmerman, B.J. (1992). Self-regulated learning in gifted students. Roeper Review, 15, 98–101.
• Ruban, L., & Reis, S. M. (2006). Patterns of self-regulatory strategy use among low-achieving and high-achieving university students. Roeper Review, 28(3).
• Runco, M. A. (1999). Divergent thinking. M. A. Runco, & S. B. Pritzker (Ed.)., Encyclopedia of creativity (s. 577-582). San Diego, California: Academic Press.
• Sak, U. (2010). Üstün zekalılar özellikleri tanılanmaları ve eğitimleri. Maya Akademi, Ankara.
• Schunk, D. H. (2009). Öğrenme teorileri, eğitimsel bir bakışla (çev. M. Şahin). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım
• Siegle, D., & McCoach, D. B. (2005). Motivating gifted students. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
• Simonton, D. K. (2001). Talent development as a multidimensional multiplicative and dynamic process. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 39–43.
• Sosniak, L. A. (1990). The tortoise, the hare, and the development of talent. In M. J. A. Howe (Ed.), Encouraging the development of exceptional abilities and talents (ss. 149–164). Leichester, England: The British Psychological Society.
• Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.). (2005). Conceptions of giftedness (2.Baskı). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.). (2005). Conceptions of giftedness (2.Baskı). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Stoeger, H., & Ziegler, A. (2005). Evaluation of elementary classroom self-regulated learning program for gifted mathematics underachievers. International Education Journal, 6(2), 261- 271.
• Subotnik, R.F., Olszewski-Kubilius, F., & Worrell, F.C. (2011). Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education: A Proposed Direction Forward Based on Psychological Science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1) 3–54.
• Syed, M. (2010). Bounce: Mozart, Federer, Picasso, Beckham, and the science of success. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
• Tannenbaum, A. J. (2003). Nature and nurture of giftedness. In N. Colangelo & G.A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3.Baskı, ss. 45–59). New York, NY: Allyn & Bacon.
• Tortop, H.S. (2013). A new model program for academically gifted students in turkey: overview of the education program for the gifted students’ bridge with university (EPGBU). Journal for the Education of the Young Scientist and Giftedness, 1(2), 21-31.
• Tortop, H.S. (2014). Gifted students’ views about first stage of the education program for the gifted students’ bridge with university (EPGBU). Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 15 (2), Article 5.
• Tortop, H.S., & Eker, C. (2014). Üstün yetenekliler eğitim programlarında öz-düzenlemeli öğrenme neden yer almalıdır?. Üstün Yetenekliler Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 23-41
• Tortop, H.S. (2015a). Üstün Yetenekliler Üniversite Köprüsü Eğitim Programı ÜYÜKEP Modeli. Düzce: Genç Bilge Yayıncılık.
• Tortop, H.S. (2015b). Üstün zekâlılar eğitiminde farklılaştırılmış öğretim müfredat farklılaştırma modelleri. Düzce: Genç Bilge Yayıncılık.
• Tortop, H.S. (2015c). A comparison of gifted and non-gifted students’ self-regulation skills for science learning. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 3(1), 42-57.
• Walberg, H., Williams, D. B., & Zeiser, S. (2003). Talent, accomplishment, and eminence. In N. Colangelo & G.A. Davis (Ed.), The handbook of gifted education (ss. 350-357). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Webb, J., Meckstroth, B., Tolan, S. (1994). Guiding the gifted child. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press, Inc.
• Whitmore, J. R. (1986). Understanding a lack of motivation to excel. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 66–69.
• Zimmerman, B. J. & Schunk, D. H. (2004). Self-regulating intellectual processes and outcomes: A social cognitive perspective. In D.Y. Dai & R.J. Sternberg (Eds), Motivation, emotion and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning and development (ss. 323– 350), Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2.baskı., ss. 1–37). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
• Zimmerman, B. J. (2002a). Developing self-regulated learners beyond achievement to self- efficacy, Washington: American Psychological Association.
• Zimmerman, B. J. (2002b) Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.
• Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 51–59.