An Evaluation of Gifted Students’ Perceptions on Critical Thinking Skills

Year 2018, , 1 - 16, 15.12.2018

Sinan Schreglmann , Fikriye Kanatlı Öztürk

https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.463711

Cited By: 3

Abstract

The present study is
a qualitative research which aims to identify gifted students’ perceptions on
critical thinking skills. The participants of the study are 34 students who are
still enrolled to Science and Arts Center in Hatay, Turkey. As data analysis method,
content analysis has been used, and the data has been gathered through a
semi-structured interview form which consists of open-ended questions. The
gathered data has been analyzed with NVivo11Pro and SPSS 20,0 programs. The
results of the study show that the perceptions of gifted students on critical
thinking skills are in line with the literature. However, it has been revealed
that they have a fundamental problem in their “perceptions on critical thinking
skills” as they perceive the word “critics” as a negative concept. As a result,
it is suggested that educators working at Science and Arts Centers should know
the concepts they use. Besides that they should also head for academical and in
class activities if there is a misconception to identify and fix them.

Keywords

Gifted, Science and Arts Center, Critical Thinking

References

• Aybek, B. (2006). Konu ve beceri temelli eleştirel düşünme öğretiminin öğretmen adaylarının eleştirel düşünme eğilimi ve düzeyine etkisi. Doktora Tezi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Adana.
• Bacanlı, H. (2015). Eğitim psikolojisi (22. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
• Bailin, S. (2002). Critical thinking and science. Journal of Science and Education, 11, 361-375.
• Banks,C., McCarthy, J. & Rasool, J. (1993). Critical thinking-reading and writing in a diverse world. California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
• Bozkurt, O. ve Koray, Ö. (2002). İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Çevre Eğitiminde sera Etkisi İle İlgili Kavram Yanılgıları. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23, 67-73.
• Carnine D.W. (1993). Effective teaching for higher cognitive functioning, Educational Technology, 33(10), 29-33.
• Danili E. & Reid N. (2004). Some strategies to improve performance in school chemistry, based on two cognitive factors, Research in Science and Technological Education, 22, 201-223.
• Demir, M. K. (2006). İlköğretim dördüncü ve beşinci sınıf öğrencilerinin sosyal bilgiler derslerinde eleştirel düşünme düzeylerinin çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Ankara.
• Doğanay, A. (2000). Yaratıcı öğrenme. A.Şimşek (Ed.). Sınıfta Demokrasi. Ankara: Eğitim-Sen Yayınları.
• Ennis, R.H. (1991). Goals for a critical thinking curriculum, in a costa (ed.). developing minds. (Vol.1). Alexandria: Virginia. ASCD.
• Facione, N. C. & Facione, P. A. (1996). Externalizing the critical thinking inknowledge development and clinical judgment. Nursing Outlook. 44, 129-136.
• Fogarty, R. & McTighe, J. (1993). Educating teachers for higher order thinking: the three-story intellect, Theory into Practice, 32, 161-169.
• Güneş, F. (2012). Öğrencilerin düşünme becerilerini geliştirme. Türklük Bilimi Araştırmaları Dergisi. 32(1), 127-146.
• Halpern, D.F. (1999). Teaching for critical thinking: helping college students develop the skills and dispositions of a critical thinker, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 9(1), 69-74.
• İpşiroğlu, Z. (2002). Türk eğitim sisteminde yaratıcılık. Ayşegül Ataman (Ed.). Ankara: Türk Eğitim Derneği Yayınları.
• Kaya, H. (1997). Üniversite öğrencilerinde eleştirel akıl yürütme gücü. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimler Enstitüsü. İstanbul.
• Kazancı, O. (1989). Eğitimde eleştirici düşünme ve öğretimi. İstanbul: Kazancı Kitap.
• Kontaş, H. (2009). Bilsem öğretmenlerinin program geliştirme ihtiyaçlarına ilişkin geliştirilen programın etkililiği.(Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Ankara, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
• Lewis A.,& Smith D. (1993). Teaching for higher order thinking .Theory into Practice, 32(3), 131-137.
• Linder, C. J. (1993). A Challenge to Conceptual Change. Science Education. 77, 293–300.
• Marioni, C. (1989). Aspect of Srudent’s Understanding in Classroom Setting: Case Studies on Motion and Intertia. Physics Education. 24, 273 – 277.
• MEB (2007). Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Bilim ve Sanat Merkezleri Yönergesi. http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/2593_0.html. Erişim Tarihi: 12.04.2013
• Miles, M. & Huberman, M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook qualitative data analysis. London: SAGE Publications.
• Nakhleh, M. B. (1993). Are our students conceptual thinkers or algorithmic problem solvers? Journal of Chemical Education, 70(1), 52–55.
• Norris, S. P. (1985). Synthesis of research on critical thinking. Educational Leadership. 8, 40-45.
• Özenç, M. & Özenç E. G. (2013). Türkiye’de üstün yetenekli öğrencilerle ilgili yapılan lisansüstü eğitim tezlerinin çok boyutlu olarak incelenmesi. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi. 171, 13-28.
• Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research evaluation methods. California: Sage Publication.
• Paul R. (1996). Critical thinking workshop handbook, Center for Critical Thinking, CA: Sonoma State University Pub.
• Paul, R., Binker, A., Douglas, M. & Adamson, K. (1990). Critical thinking handbook: high school a guide for redesigning ınstruction. center for critical thinking and moral critique. Sonoma State University Pub.
• Paul, R.W. (1988). Staff development for critical thinking: lesson plan remodelling as the strategy. A.L. Costa (Ed.). Developing Minds (A Reseource Book For Teaching Thinking). Revised Education. Alexandria. Virginia: ASCD.
• Pushkin D.B. ( 2000). Critical thinking in science – How do we recognize it? Do we foster it? Perspectives in Critical Thinking. Theory and Practice, 1(1), 211-220.
• Renaud, R. (2002). The effect of higher order questions on critical thinking skills. Yayınlanmış Doktora Tezi. London: The University of Western Ontario.
• Renzulli, J. S. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for gifted. USA: Creative Learning Press.
• Renzulli, J. S. (1999). What is thing called giftedness, and how do we develop it? A twenty-five year perspective. Journal for the Education of Gifted, 23(1), 3-54.
• Renzulli, J.S. & Reis, S.M. (1985). The school wide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence, Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
• Riche, R. D. (2000). Strategies for Assisting Students Overcome Their Misconceptions in High School Physics. Memorial University of Newfoundland Education. 6390.
• Sadık, F. (2014). Çocuk ve çevre sorunları: çocukların algıladıkları çevre sorunlarıyla ilgili görüşlerinin incelenmesi. The Journal of Academic Social Science. 2(8), 114-133.
• Schafersman S.D. (1991). An Introduction to critical thinking. www.usafreepress.org/50k_/ct_edu.html. Erişim tarihi: 19.09.2013
• Sünbül A., Çalışkan M. & Kozan S. (2009). Eleştirel düşünme becerisine dayalı öğretim uygulamasının öğrenci erişine etkisi. http://tef.selcuk.edu.tr/ sunbul/g/g22.pdf. Erişim tarihi: 12.07.2013
• Tannenbaum, A.J. (2003). Nature and nurture of giftedness. in N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.
• Tao, P. K. ve Gunstone, R. F. (1999). The Process of Conceptual Chance in Force and Motion During Computer Supported physics Intructions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. (36), 859 – 882.
• Tardif, T. Z. & Sternberg, R. J. (1988). What do we know about creativity?(Ed. R. J. Sternberg). The nature of creativity. USA: Cambridge University Press. pp. 429-440.
• Tytler, R. (1998). The Nature of Students’ Informal Science Conceptions. International Jornal of Science Educetion. 20, (8), 901 – 927.
• Wandersee, J. H., Mintzes, J. J. ve Novak, J., D. (1994). Reserch on Alternative Conceptions in Science in Gabel. Dorothy J. Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning. New York: MacMillan.
• Whitmore, J. R. (1980). Giftedness, conflict and underachievement. Boston: Allyn & Bacon Publications.
• Yağcı R. (2008). Sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde eleştirel düşünme: ilköğretim 5. sınıf sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde öğretmenlerin eleştirel düşünme becerilerini geliştirmek için uyguladıkları etkinliklerin değerlendirilmesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Adana.
• Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (8.Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Zohar, A. (2004). Higher order thinking in science classrooms: Students learning and teachers’ professional development. Nether land: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Zoller U., Lubezky A., Nakhleh M.B., Tessier B. & Dori J. (1995). Success on algorithmic and LOCS vs. conceptual chemistry exam questions, Journal of Chemical Education, 72, 987-989.
• Zoller, U. (1993). Are lecture and learning compatible? Maybe for LOCS; unlikely for HOCS. Journal of Chemical Education, 70 (3), 195–197.