A Comparison of Gifted and Non-gifted Students’ Self-regulation Skills for Science Learning

Year 2015, Volume: 3 Issue: 1, 42 - 57, 02.03.2015

Hasan Said Tortop

Abstract

The studies related to what skills are firstly needed to be gained in the gifted students’ education are increasing gradually. The gifted individuals’ being independent learners are desirable situation. Self-regulation skills are a set of abilities that help a person to control and monitor their own behavior, thoughts and changing flexibly them in accordance with the demands of the situation. When viewed from this aspect, it can be said that self-regulation skills should be gained in the educations of the gifted students. In this study, a Self-regulation Skills for Science Learning Scale (SSSLS) has been developed by researcher. Thanks to this scale, the self-regulation skills of the gifted students and non-gifted in learning science have been compared. The sample of the research has been determined in accordance with purposeful sampling method. Non-gifted students are the students who study in two schools determined according to typical sampling method in a province the socio-economic level of which in Turkey is medium-scale. The gifted students are those who enrolled in Science and Art Centre that gives education to the gifted students in the same province. 264 students have been determined at the level of 4th to 8th grade in the sample of the research. As the result of research findings, it has been determined that gifted students’ self-regulation skills for science learning are higher than the non-gifted students. It has seen that there are significant differences between the self-regulation skills points of both groups in science learning (p<0.001).However, a significant difference hasn’t been seen at the metacognitive skills dimension that is one of the sub-dimensions of the scale (p>0.05).The metacognitive skills contain very important skills (e.g. goal setting, monitoring, self-assessment, regulation) on the nurturing of talent. The students’ not having differentiation in the scores of metacognitive skills can be indicator that available gifted education programs doesn’t have the quality to develop these skills.

Keywords

gifted education, self-regulation skills for science learning, gifted and non-gifted students

References

• Ablard, K. E., & Lipschultz, R. E. (1998). Self-regulated learning in high achieving students: relation to advanced reasoning, achievement goals, and gender. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 94–101.
• Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P.D., & Paris, S.G. (2008). Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 364–373
• Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview.
• Arbuckle, J. L. (2012). IBM SPSS Amos 19 User’s Guide. http://www.amosdevelopment.com/download/amos.pdf
• Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V.S. Ramachaudran (eds.) Encyclopedia of human behavior (pp. 71–81), New York: Academic Press.
• Barrett, P., (2007). Structural equation modelling: adjudging model fit. Personal and Individual Differences, 42, 815-824
• Bas, T. (2007). The comparison of self regulation skills across grade levels in web-based education. Master Thesis, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
• Betts, G. T. (1986). The autonomous learner model: For the gifted and talented. Greeley, CO: ALPS Publishing.
• Betts, G. T., & Kercher, J. K. (1999).The autonomous learner model: optimizing ability. Greeley, CO: ALPS Publishing.
• Black, A. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). The effects of instructors’ autonomy support and students’ autonomous motivation on learning and organic chemistry: A self-determination theory perspective. Science Education, 84, 740-756.
• Boekaerts, M. (1998). Do culturally rooted self-construal affect students’ conceptualization of control over learning?, Educational Psychologist, 33, 87–108
• Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R., & Zeidner, M. (2000). Handbook of Self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Pres.
• Buyukozturk, S. (2007). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [Handbook of data analysis for social sciences], Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.
• Buyukozturk, S., Cakmak, E.,K., Akgun, O.,E., Karadeniz, S., & Demirel, F. (2011). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (8th Ed) [Scientific research methods], Ankara: PegemA yayıncılık.
• Byrne, B. M. (2011) Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Second Edi., Mahwah, NJ: LEA, London, 2011.
• 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.
• Clark, B. (1992). Growing up gifted: Developing the potential of children at home and at school. (4th Ed.), New York: Merrill.
• Cleary, T. J., Callan, G. L., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2012). Assessing self-regulation as a cyclical, context-specific phenomenon: Overview and analysis of SRL microanalytic protocols. Education Research International, 2012, 1-19.
• Colakoglu, O., & Eksi, C., (2014). Açımlayıcı faktör analiz sürecini etkileyen unsurların değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of factors effecting exploratory factor analysis process]. Karaelmas Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 2(1), 58-64.
• Coleman, L. J., & Cross, T. L. (2000). Social and emotional development and the personal experience of giftedness. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Mönks, R. Subotnik, & R. Sternberg (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 203–212). New York: Elsevier.
• Covington, M. V., & Dray, E. (2002). The developmental course of achievement motivation: A need-based approach. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 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.
• Cross, T. L. (2011). On the social and emotional lives of gifted children (4th Ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
• Cross, T. L., & Coleman, L. J. (2005). School-based conception of giftedness. In R.J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 52–63). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• 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. (4th Ed). USA: Allyn & Bacon. Chapter 15 (p342-362).
• 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.
• Feldhusen, J. F., & Kolloff, P. B. (1986). The Purdue three-stage enrichment model for gifted education at the elementary level. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
• 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.
• Gagne, F. (2005). From noncompetence to exceptional talent: Exploring the range of academic achievement within and between grade levels. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 139–153.
• Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic books.
• Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic books.
• Harris, T., & Hodges, R. (1995). The literacy dictionary: The vocabulary of reading and writing. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
• Heller, K. A. (1999). Individual (learning and motivational) needs versus instructional conditions of gifted education. High Ability Studies, 10(1), 9–21.
• Hoe, S.L., (2008). Issues and procedures in adopting structural equation modeling Technique. Journal of Application Quantity Method, 3(1), 76-83.
• 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.
• Housand, A., & Reis, S. M. (2008). Self-regulated learning in reading: Gifted pedagogy and instructional settings. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20, 108–136.
• 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.
• Klien, P. (1994). An easy guide to factor analysis, London: Routledge.
• Kline, R. B. (1998). Principal and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
• 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.
• Maker, C.J., & Nielson, A.B. (1995) Teaching models in education of the gifted (2nd Ed.). Texas: Pro-Ed.
• Mayer, R. E. (2005). The scientific study of giftedness. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd Ed., pp. 437–447). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. London: Sage Publication.
• 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, DOI: 10.1080/13598130220132316.
• Obergriesser, S., Steinbach, J., & Stoeger, H. (2013). Emotional experience during participation in a program of self-regulated learning. International Conference on Talent Development & Excellence Congress. September 25-28 2013, Antalya, Turkey.
• Park, G., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2007). Contrasting intellectual patterns predict creativity in the arts and sciences: Tracking intellectually precocious youth over 25 years. Psychological Science, 18, 948–952.
• Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16 (4), 385-407.
• Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33- 40.
• Pintrich, P.R. (2000). The roal of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich ve M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation: Theory, Research and Applications (pp. 452–502) içinde, San Diego, CA: Academic Pres.
• Pintrich, P.R., Smith, D.A.F., Garcia, T., & Mc Keachie, W.J., (1993). Reliability and Predictive of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801-813.
• 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.
• Ramdass, D., & Zimmerman, B. J., (2011). Developing self-regulation skills: the important role of homework. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(2), 194-218. DOI: 10.1177/1932202X1102200202. 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 (pp. 53-92). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: A how-to guide for educational excellence (2nd ed.). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
• Renzulli, J.S., & Park, S. (2002). Giftedness and high school dropout: Personal, family, and school related factors. Storss, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
• Rimm, S.B. (2001). How Jane won. New York: Crown Publishers.
• 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 (Eds)., Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 577-582). San Diego, California: Academic Press.
• Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749-761.
• Sak, U. (2010). Üstün zekalılar özellikleri tanılanmaları ve eğitimleri [Gifted students: Identifications, characterictics and their educations]. Maya Akademi, Ankara.
• Sak, U., (2011). An overview and social validity of Education Programs for Talented Students Models (EPTS). Education and Science, 36, 213-229.
• 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. (2000). Creativity: Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American Psychologist, 55, 151–157.
• Simonton, D. K. (2001). Talent development as a multidimensional multiplicative and dynamic process. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 39–43.
• Smith-Donald, R., Raver, C. C., Hayes, T., & Richardson, B. (2007). Preliminary construct and concurrent validity of the Preschool Self-regulation Assessment (PSRA) for field-based research. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22, 173-187.
• 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 (pp. 149–164). Leichester, England: The British Psychological Society.
• Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (Eds.). (2005). Conceptions of giftedness (2nd Ed.). 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. (1986). Giftedness: A psychosocial approach. In R.J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 21–52). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Tannenbaum, A. J. (2003). Nature and nurture of giftedness. In N. Colangelo & G.A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 45–59). New York, NY: Allyn & Bacon.
• Tortop, H. S., & Eker, C., (2014). Üstün yetenekliler eğitim programlarında öz-düzenlemeli öğrenme neden yer almalıdır? [Why should self-regulated learning skills take place in gifted education programs?]. Üstün Yetenekliler Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 23-41.
• Tortop, H. S., & Kunt, K., (2013). Investigation of primary school teachers’ attitudes towards gifted education. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 5 (2), 441-451
• Tortop, H. S., (2014). Gifted students’ views about first stage of the Education Program for the Gifted Students’ Bridge with University (EPGBU). Turkish Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 15(2), 62-74
• Tortop, H.S. (2013a). 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. (2013b). Üstün Yetenekliler Üniversite Köprüsü Eğitim Programı (ÜYÜKEP). International Conference on Talent Development & Excellence Kongresi. 25-28 Eylül 2013, Antalya, Türkiye.
• Treffinger, D.J. (1975) Teaching for self-directed learning: A priority for the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 19(1), 46-59.
• Uredi, I. (2005). The contributions of perceived parenting styles to 8th class primary school students' self-regulated learning strategies and motivational beliefs. Doctoral Thesis, Yildiz Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey. [in Turkish]
• Uredi, I., & Uredi, L. (2005). The predictive power of self-regulation strategies and motivational beliefs on mathematics achievement of primary school 8th grade students. Mersin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 1(2), 250-260. [in Turkish]
• Walberg, H., Williams, D. B., & Zeiser, S. (2003). Talent, accomplishment, and eminence. In N. Colangelo & G.A. Davis (Eds.), The handbook of gifted education (pp. 350-357). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Webb, J., Meckstroth, B., Tolan, S. (1994). Guiding the gifted child. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press, Inc.
• Winner, E. (1996). Gifted children: Myths and realities. New York, NY: Basic Books.
• Winner, E. (2009). Toward broadening our understanding of giftedness: The spatial domain. In F. D. Horowitz, R. F. Subotnik, & DJ. Matthews (Eds.), The development of giftedness and talent across the lifespan (pp. 75–85). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/11867-005.
• Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H., (2003). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in social sciences]. Seçkin Yayıncılık. 3. Baskı. Ankara.
• 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 (pp. 323–350), Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Developing self-fulfilling cycles of academic regulation: An analysis of exemplary instructional models. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (eds.), Self-regulated learning: from teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 1–20), New York, NY: The Guilford press.
• 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 (2nd Ed., pp. 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.
• Zimmerman, B. J., Bonner S., & Kovach, R. (1996). Developing self-regulated learners, beyond achievement to self-efficacy. Washington: American Psychological Association.