Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Çevre Dostu STEM Projeleri Tasarımı

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin gerçek dünya problemi bağlamında sunulan
STEM odaklı projeler tasarlama sürecindeki deneyimlerini incelemektir. İç içe geçmiş tek durum
deseninin kullanıldığı bu araştırmada Bilim ve Sanat Merkezinde öğrenim gören 3-4 ve 5-6. sınıf
seviyesindeki üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin STEM odaklı çevre dostu projeler tasarlama sürecinde
kullandıkları stratejiler ve deneyimleri ortaya konulmaktadır. Çalışmanın katılımcılarını Bilim ve
Sanat Merkezindeki 3-4. ve 5-6. sınıf seviyesinde öğrenim gören 17 öğrenci oluşturmaktadır.
Araştırma kapsamında toplanan verileri video ve ses kayıtları, öğrencilerin tasarım ürünleri, açık
uçlu bireysel ve grup değerlendirmeleri ve öğretmen günlükleri oluşturmaktadır. Verilerin
analizinde içerik analizi uygulanmıştır. Çalışmanın bulguları, öğrencilere kişisel ya da bağlamsal
olarak anlamlı otantik STEM öğrenme deneyimleri sunulması durumunda, problem senaryosunda
sunulan kriterleri ve kısıtlamaların yanı sıra finansal ve çevresel perspektifleri incelemelerini
sağlayan eleştirel bir düşünme eğilimi benimseyebildiklerini göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• STEM eğitimi,üstün yetenekliler,mühendislik tasarım,çevre eğitimi,durum çalışması

Gifted Students Designing Eco-Friendly STEM Projects

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the experiences of gifted students while designing a
STEM-based environmental project within a real-world context. The study employed a single case
study with embedded units design in order to investigate the strategies that gifted students exploited
in designing their STEM Projects, as well as their experiences in the actual design process. The data
collected in the current study were in the form of video recordings, audio recordings, student
artifacts, individual and group assessment forms with open-ended questions, and the teacher’s
journal. The participants of the current study involved 17 students from 3-4th and 5-6th grade science
classes at a Science and Arts Center. The analysis of the data was achieved using content analysis.
The findings indicated that when students were presented authentic STEM learning experiences that
involve personally or contextually meaningful content, they adopt a critical thinking disposition that
allowed them to investigate the criteria and constraints presented in the problem scenario, as well as
the financial and environmental perspectives.

Keywords

• STEM education,gifted students,engineering design,environmental education,case study

References

1. Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559.
2. Bybee, R. W. (2014). NGSS and the next generation of science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 211-221.
3. Clark, B. (1997). Growing up gifted (5th ed.). Upper Saddle Hill, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4. Downe-Wamboldt, B. (1992). Content analysis: Method, applications, and issues. Health Care for Women International, 13(3), 313-321.
5. Hockett, J. (2009). Curriculum for highly able learners that conforms to general education and gifted education quality indicators. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 32(3), 394-440.
6. Kaplan, A., Doruk, M., & Ozturk, M. (2017). Examine of Reflective Thinking Skill toward Problem Solving of Talent Students: A Sample of Gumushane. Journal of Bayburt Education Faculty, 12(23), 415-435.
7. Koshy, V. (2002). Teaching gifted children 4-7: A Guide For Teachers. London: David Fulton.
8. Lang, M., Drake, S., & Olson, J. (2006). Discourse and the new didactics of scientific literacy. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(2), 177-188.

9. Marland, S. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented. Report to the Congress of the United States by the U.S. Commissioner of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
10. Moore, T. J., Stohlmann, M. S., Wang, H. -H., Tank, K. M., Glancy, A. W., & Roehrig, G. H. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. E. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in Precollege Settings: Synthesizing Research, Policy & Practices (pp. 36-60). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
11. Morris, J., Slater, E., Fitzgerald, M. T., Lummis, G. W., & van Etten, E. (2019). Using Local Rural Knowledge to Enhance STEM Learning for Gifted and Talented Students in Australia. Research in Science Education, 1-19.
12. National Academy of Engineering. (2014). STEM Integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
13. National Research Council. (2011). Successful K–12 STEM Education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academics Press.
14. Next Generation Science Standards Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
15. Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections (Vol. 13). London: The Nuffield Foundation.
16. Pendergraft, K., Daugherty, M. K., & Rossetti, C. (2009). English language learner engineering collaborative. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 68(4), 10-14.
17. Purcell, J., Burns, D., Tomlinson, C., Imbeau, M., & Martin, J. (2002). Bridging the gap: A tool and technique to analyze and evaluate gifted education curricular units. Gifted Child Quarterly 46(4), 306-321.
18. Reis, S. (2007). No child left bored. School Administrator, 64(2), 22-27.
19. Robbins, J. I. (2011). Adapting science curricula for high-ability learners. In J. VanTassel-Baska & C. A. Little (Eds.), Content-based curriculum for high-ability learners (2nd ed., pp. 437-465). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
20. Robinson, A., Dailey, D., Hughes, G., & Cotabish, A. (2014). The effects of a science-focused STEM intervention on gifted elementary students’ science knowledge and skills. Journal of Advanced Academics, 25(3), 189-213.
21. Robinson, A., Shore, B. M., & Enersen, D. L. (2007). Best practices in gifted education: An evidencebased guide. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
22. Roehrig, G. H., Moore, T. J., Wang, H.-H., & Park, M. S. (2012). Is Adding the E Enough? Investigating the Impact of K-12 Engineering Standards on the Implementation of STEM Integration. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 31-44.
23. Ross, J. A. (1993). Teacher efficacy and the effects of coaching on student achievement. Canadian Journal of Education, 17(1), 41-65.
24. Seeley, K. (1989). Facilitators for the gifted. In I. Feldhusen, J. VanTassel-Baska, & K. Seeley (Eds.), Excellence in educating the gifted. Denver, CO: Love Publishing Company.
25. Siegle, D., Rubenstein, L. D., & Mitchell, M. S. (2014). Honors students’ perceptions of their high school experiences: the influence of teachers on student motivation. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58, 35–50.
26. Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
27. U.S. Department of Education. (2010). A Blueprint for Reform: The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/blueprint.pdf.
28. VanTassel-Baska, J. (1986). Effective curriculum and instructional models for talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30(4), 164-169.
29. VanTassel-Baska, J. (1998). Planning science programs for high ability learners. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
30. VanTassel-Baska, J. (2003). Curriculum planning and instructional design for gifted learners. Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
31. VanTassel-Baska, J. (2012). Analyzing differentiation in the classroom: Using the COS-R. Gifted Child Today, 35(1), 42-48.
32. Vedder‐Weiss, D., & Fortus, D. (2012). Adolescents’ declining motivation to learn science: A follow‐up study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1057-1095.
33. Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.
34. Winebrenner, S. (2000). Gifted Students need an education, too. Educational Leadership, 58(1), 52-56.
35. Yin, (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.