Metacognitive Awareness and Autonomous Learning Skill Levels in Gifted Children

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between metacognitive awareness and autonomous learning skill levels of gifted students. The research sample consists of 338 gifted students in the 3-4-5-6-7-8th grade levels studying at Izmit Science and Art Center. The research was designed in the correlational screening model, one of the quantitative research methods. The research data were collected with Metacognitive Awareness A and B Scales and Autonomous Learning Scale. In the study, it was found that there was no significant relationship between metacognitive awareness and autonomous learning skills of gifted students studying at the 3-4-5th grade levels. It was found that there was a moderate, positive and significant relationship between metacognitive awareness and autonomous learning skills of gifted students studying at the 6-7-8th grade level. It was found that the metacognitive awareness levels of gifted students studying at the 3-4-5th grade level were at a medium level, while the metacognitive awareness levels of gifted students studying at the 6-7-8th grade level were at a high level. In the study, it was determined that the autonomous learning skill levels of gifted students studying at both 3-4-5th grade levels and 6-7-8th grade levels were at a medium level.

Keywords

• Gifted
• metacognition
• metacognitive awareness
• autonomous learning

References

1. Açıkgöz, K. Ü. (2003). Etkili öğrenme ve öğretme. Eğitim Dünyası Yayınları.
2. Akın, E., & Çeçen, M. A. (2014). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin okuma stratejileri üstbilişsel farkındalık düzeylerinin değerlendirilmesi Muş Bulanık örneği. International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 9(8), 91-110. https://app.trdizin.gov.tr/makale/TWpjME1EQTRPQT09/ortaokul-ogrencilerinin-okuma-stratejileri-ustbilissel-farkindalik-duzeylerinin-degerlendirilmesi-mus-bulanik-ornegi-
3. Arseven, A. (2016). Üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin öğrenme stillerinin çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Journal of Turkish Studies, 11(3), 151-168. http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.9255
4. Arslan, S., & Yurdakul, C. (2015). Turkish adaptation and validation of autonomous learning scale. The Journal of International Social Research, 8(39), 565-569. http://dx.doi.org/10.17719/jisr.20153913775
5. Ataman, A. (2004). Üstün zekalı ve özel yetenekli çocuklar [Gifted and talented children]. M. R. Şirin, A. Kulaksızoğlu, & A. E. Bilgili (Eds.), Üstün yetenekli çocuklar: Seçilmiş makaleler kitabı içinde (ss. 155-168). Çocuk Vakfı Yayınları.
6. Ataman, A. (2018). Üstün zekalılar ve üstün zekalılar konusunda bilinmesi gerekenler. A. Ataman (Ed.), Üstün zekalılar ve üstün zekalılar konusunda bilinmesi gerekenler [Things to know about the gifted and the gifted] içinde (ss. 1-30). Vize Yayıncılık.
7. Aydın, E. (2022). Türkçe Öğretmeni adaylarının üstbilişsel farkındalık düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Türk Eğitim Dergisi, 7(1), 121-131. https://doi.org/10.54979/turkegitimdergisi.1059829
8. Barfurth, M. A., Ritchie, K. C., Irving, J. A., & Shore, B. M. (2009). A metacognitive portrait of gifted learners. L.V. Shavinina (Ed.), International handbook on giftedness içinde (ss. 397-417). Springer Science+Business Media B.V. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6162-2 18.

9. Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Longman.
10. Bentler, P. M. (1980). Multivariate analysis with latent variables: Causal modeling. Annual review of psychology, 31(1), 419-456.
11. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
12. Berber, N. (2019). Exploring gifted students’ science homework self-regulation skills (Tez Numarası:605303) [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi]. Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
13. Bildiren, A. (2011). Üstün yetenekli çocuklar aileler ve öğretmenler için bir kılavuz. Doğan Egmont Yayıncılık.
14. Breed, B., Mentz, E., & Westhuizen, G. (2014). A metacognitive approach to pair programming: Influence on metacognitive awareness. The Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 12(1), 33-60. https://doi.org/10.14204/ejrep.32.13104
15. Broady, E., & Kenning, M. M. (1996). Learner autonomy: An introduction to the issues. E. Broady, & M. M. Kenning (Eds.), Promoting learner autonomy in university language teaching içinde (ss. 9-22). Association for French Language Studies.
16. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. K. A. Bollen, & J. S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation models içinde (ss. 136-162). SAGE.
17. Bonds, C. W., Bonds, L. G., & Peach, W. (1992). Metacognition: developing indepence in learning. Clearing House, 66(1), 56-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.1992.9955930
18. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum. Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
19. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2018). Eğitimde bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Pegem Akademi yayıncılık.
20. Byrne, B., & Campbell, T. (1999). Cross-cultural comparisons and the presumption of equivalen tmeasurement and theoretica lstructure: A look beneath the surface. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 555-574. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220221990300050
21. Camcı Erdoğan, S. (2014). Üstün zekalı ve yetenekli öğrenciler için fen bilimleri eğitiminde farklılaştırmanın gerekliliği. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 2(2), 1-10. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jegys/issue/37434/432895
22. Carr, P. B. (1999). The measurement of resourcefulness intentions in the adult autonomous learner [Doctoral dissertation, George Washington University]. https://www.proquest.com/openview/520b5117b9684e0d0b05531bc71b5edf/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
23. Chan, D. (2001). Learning styles of gifted and non-gifted secondary students in Hong Kong. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45(1), 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620104500106
24. Confessore, G. J., & Park, E. (2004). Factor validation of the learner autonomy profile, version 3.0 and extraction of the short form. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning, 39-58.
25. Cotton, G. (2010). Metacognition in a gifted classroom: planning, note-taking, and checking for accuracy, [Master of Arts, The Universıty of British Columbia]. https://open.library.ubc.ca/soa/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/24/items/1.0071128
26. De Vreeze Westgeest, M.,G., J. & Vogelaar, B. (2022). Cognitive training in the domain of mathematics for potentially gifted children in primary school. Education Sciences 12(2), 127. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12020127
27. Demir, Ö. & Doğanay, A. (2009). Bilişsel farkındalık becerilerinin geliştirilmesinde bilişsel koçluk yaklaşımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 60(60), 601-624. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kuey/issue/10337/126670
28. Demir, Ö., & Kaya, H. İ. (2015). Öğretmen adaylarının bilişsel farkındalık beceri düzeylerinin eleştirel düşünme durumları ile ilişkilerinin incelenmesi. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 5(1), 35-68. https://doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2015.003
29. Deregözü, A. (2014). Özerk öğrenme bağlamında Almanca öğretmeni yetiştirilmesi: İstanbul Üniversitesi örneği. (Tez Numarası: 381939) [Yüksek lisans tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi]. Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
30. Derrick, M. G. (2001). The measurement of an adult’s intention to exhibit persistence in autonomous learning. [Doctoral Dissertation, The George Washington University]. https://www.proquest.com/pqdtglobal/docview/276280161/BB2C5CCE7F304A2FPQ/2
31. Dilekli, Y. (2017). The relationships between critical thinking skills and learning styles of gifted students. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(4), 69-96. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.344919
32. Doğanay, A. (1997). Ders dinleme sırasında bilişsel farkındalıkla ilgili stratejilerin kullanımı. Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(15), 34-42. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/hunefd/issue/7792/101948
33. Enç, M. (1979). Üstün beyin gücü gelişim ve eğitimleri. Kadıoğlu Matbaası.
34. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
35. Georghiades, P. (2000). Beyond conceptual change learning in science education: Focusing on transfer, durability and metacognition. Educational Research, 42(2), 119-139. https://doi.org/10.1080/001318800363773
36. Glass, T. F. (2004). What gift?: The reality of the student who is gifted and talented in public school classrooms. Gifted Child Today, 27(4), 25-29. https://doi.org/10.4219/gct-2004-152
37. Gökdere, M., & Ayvacı, H. Ş. (2004). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin üstün yetenekli çocuklar ve özellikleri ile ilgili bilgi seviyelerinin belirlenmesi. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18, 17-26.
38. Hodge, K. A., & Kemp, C. R. (2000). Exploring the nature of giftedness in preschool children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 24(1), 46-73. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320002400103
39. Holec, H. (2009). Autonomy in language learning: A single pedagogical. F. Kjisik, P. Voller, N. Aoki, & Y. N. (Eds.) Mapping the terrain of learner autonomy: Learning environments, learning communities and identities içinde (ss. 21-47). Tampere University Press.
40. Holton, D., & Gaffney, M. (1994). Teaching talented students. J. N. (Ed.) Mathematics education: A handbook for teacher içinde (ss. 397-409). New Zealand: Wellington College of Education.
41. Horn, C. (2002). Raising expectations of children from poverty. Gifted Education Press Quarterly, 16(4), 2-5.
42. Hsieh, H. (2010). Self access center and autonomous learning: Efl college students’ motivations, activities and perceptions of learning effectiveness [Doctoral thesis, Indiana University]. https://www.proquest.com/openview/dc32878e9eeb84bfd3d1159fb122833a/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
43. Ilıman, M. (2018). Özerk öğrenme, yansıtıcı düşünme ve başarı yönelimleri arasındaki ilişkiler: İngilizce dersi örneği. (Tez No: 524636) [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi]. Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
44. İmre, N. (2015). An investigation into relationship between degree of learning autonomy, academic and social variables (Tez No:414616) [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi]. Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
45. Jackson, N., & Klein, E. (1997). Gifted performance on young children. Ally and Bacon.
46. Jackson, P. S., & Peterson, J. (2003). Depressive disorder in highly gifted adolescents. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14, 175-186. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2003-42
47. Karakelle, S. (2012). Üst bilişsel farkındalık, zekâ, problem çözme algısı ve düşünme ihtiyacı arasındaki bağlantılar. Eğitim ve Bilim, 37(164), 237-250. http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/779/376
48. Karakelle, S., & Saraç, S. (2007). Çocuklar için üst bilişsel farkındalık ölçeği (ÜBFÖ-Ç) A ve B formları: geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 10(20), 87-103. https://www.psikolog.org.tr/tr/yayinlar/dergiler/1031828/tpy1301996120070000m000163.pdf
49. Kaya, M. (2012). Uzaktan eğitimde öğrenenlerin yabancı dil öğreniminde özerk öğrenme becerileri: Uzaktan İÖLP örneği. (Tez No: 317630) [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Anadolu Üniversitesi]. Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
50. Kahyaoğlu, P., & Pesen, A. (2013). Üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin fen ve teknolojiye yönelik tutumları, öğrenme ve motivasyon stilleri arasındaki ilişki. Türk Üstün Zeka ve Eğitim Dergisi, 13(1), 38-49. https://www.academia.edu/10215880
51. Katman, N. (2019). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin üst bilişsel farkındalığı, öz yeterlilik inançları ve yabancı dil öğrenme kaygıları arasındaki ilişkilerin yapısal eşitlik modellemesi ile incelenmesi. (Tez No: 588596) [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Akdeniz Üniversitesi]. Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
52. Keegan, D. (1996). Foundations of distance education. Routledge.
53. Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Publications.
54. Koshy, V. (2002). Teaching gifted children 4-7: A guide for teachers. David Pulton Publishers.
55. Kuhn, D., & Dean, D. (2010). Metacognition: A bridge between cognitive. Theory Into Practice, 368-273. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4304_4
56. Levent, F. (2011). Üstün yeteneklilerin eğitimine yönelik görüş ve politikaların incelenmesi. (Tez No: 298643) [Doktora Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi]. Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
57. Littlewood, W. (1999). Defining and developing autonomy in East Asian contexts. Applied Linguistics, 20(1), 71-94. https://academic.oup.com/applij/article-abstract/20/1/71/163561
58. Livingston, J. A. (2003). Metacognition: An overview. The Educational Resources Informational Center (ERIC). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED474273
59. Lowe, C. (2009). A correlational study of the relationship between learner autonomy and academic performance. [Doctoral Thesis, The George Washington University]. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.614.3742&rep=rep1&type=pdf
60. Macaskill, A., & Taylor, E. (2010). The development of a brief measure of learner autonomy in university students. Studies in Higher Education, 35(3), 351- 359. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070903502703
61. Marsh, H., Hau, K., Artelt, C., Baumert, J., & Peschar, J. (2006). OECD’s brief self-report measure of educational psychology’s most useful affective constructs: Cross-cultural, psychometric comparisons across 25 countries. International Journal of Testing, 6(4), 311-360. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327574ijt0604_1
62. Meydan, C., & Şeşen, H. (2011). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesi ve AMOS uygulamaları. Detay Yayıncılık.
63. Meyers, L., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A. (2006). Applied multivariate research: Design and interpretation. SAGE Publications.
64. McCrocklin, S. M. (2014). The potential of automatic speech recognition for fostering pronunciation learners' autonomy [Doctoral Thesis, Iowa State University]. https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/handle/20.500.12876/28089
65. Mcmillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (7 th Edition). Pearson.
66. MEB. (2018). Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı 2023 Eğitim Vizyon Belgesi. https://www.gmka.gov.tr/dokumanlar/yayinlar/2023_E%C4%9Fitim%20Vizyonu.pdf
67. MEB. (2019). Bilim ve Sanat Merkezleri yönergesi. Tebliğler Dergisi, 82(2747), 392-419. https://www.file:///C:/Users/HP/Downloads/2747_Aralik_2019.pdf
68. Meyer, D. A. (2001). The measurement of intentional behavior as a prerequisite to autonomous learning. [Doctoral Dissertation, The George Washington University]. https://www.proquest.com/openview/79d781d5888b1b7618038bc26afef908/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
69. Miller, R. C. (1990). Discovering mathematical talent (ERIC Digest No. E482). ERIC Publications (ED321487), 2-12. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED321487.pdf
70. Morawska, A., & Sanders, M. R. (2009). Parenting gifted and talented children: Conceptual and empirical foundations. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(3), 163-173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986209334962
71. NAGC. (2010). Redefining giftedness for a new century: shifting the paradigm. https://thegiftedchild.weebly.com/uploads/2/3/9/1/23911245/redefining_giftedness_for_a_new_century.pdf
72. Nunan, D. (1997). Designing and adapting materials to encourage learner autonomy. P. B. (Eds.) Autonomy and independence in language learning içinde (ss. 192-203). Addison Wesley Longman.
73. ÖRGM (2021). Bilim ve sanat merkezleri öğrenci tanılama ve yerleştirme kılavuzu. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. https://orgm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2021_12/30144032_20212022_YILI_BILIM_VE Science and art centers student identification and placement guide _SANAT_MERKEZLERI_OGRENCI_TANILAMA_VE_YERLESTIRME_KILAVUZU.pdf
74. Özsoy, G., & Günindi, Y. (2011). Okulöncesi öğretmen adaylarının üstbilişsel farkındalık düzeyleri. 10(2): 430-440. İlköğretim Online, 10(2), 430-440. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ilkonline/issue/8592/106812
75. Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1986). The enrichment triad/revolving door model: A schoolwide plan for the developmentof creative lan for the developmentof creative productivity. E. Renzulli (Edt.) Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented içinde (ss. 216-266). Creative Learning Press.
76. Risemberg, R., & Zimmerman, B. (1992). Self-regulated learning in gifted students. Roeper Review, 15(2), 98-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199209553476
77. Rotigel, J. V. (2003). Understanding the young gifted child: Guidelines for parents, families, andeducators. Early Childhood Education Journal, 30(4), 209-214. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023331422963
78. Rooper, A. (1982). How the gifted cope with their emotions. Roeper Review: A Journal on Gifted Education, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/02783198209552672
79. Schermelleh Engel, K., & Moosbrugger, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74. https://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~snijders/mpr_Schermelleh.pdf
80. Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 25(1), 113-125. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003044231033
81. Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, (19), 460-475. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
82. Schofield, N. J., & Ashman, A. F. (1987). The cognitive processing of gifted, high average, and low average ability students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 57(1), 9-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1987.tb03056.x
83. Senemoğlu, N. (2011). Gelişim, öğrenme ve öğretim. Gazi Kitapevi
84. Sperling, R. A., Howard, B. C., Miller, L. A., & Murphy, C. (2002). Measures of children's knowledge and regulation of cognition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(1), 51-79. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2001.1091
85. Taber, K. S. (2007). Science education for gifted learners? K. Taber (Edt.) Science education for gifted learners içinde (ss. 1-14). Routledge.
86. Tegmark, M. (2019). Yaşam 3.0 yapay zeka çağında insan olmak [Being human in the age of life 3.0 artificial intelligence]. (E. C. Göksoy, Çev.) Pegasus Yayınları.
87. Tüysüz, C. (2013). Üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin öğrenme stillerinin belirlenmesine yönelik bir durum çalışması: Kahramanmaraş il örneği. Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(7), 19-28. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/baebd/issue/3336/46216
88. Williams, M. (2003). The importance of metacognition in the literacy development of young gifted and talented children. Gifted Education International, 17(3), 249-258. https://doi.org/10.1177/026142940301700305
89. VanTassel-Baska, J. L. (2005). Gifted Programs and Services: What Are the Nonnegotiables? Theory Into Practice, 44(2), 90-97. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4402_3
90. Varçın, E. (2022). 6. Sınıf öğrencilerinin bloktabanlı programlamaya yönelik tutumlarının ve üst bilişsel farkındalıklarının incelenmesi. (Tez No: 721415) [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi]. Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi.