Investigation of the Gifted Education Self-Effecacy of Teachers Work with Gifted Students

Abstract

Abstarct

The competencies of the teachers of gifted children are important for the quality of gifted education. The aim of this study is to determine the self-efficacy of gifted and talented teachers working in primary and secondary schools in state schools of the Turkish Ministry of National Education. In this study, 45 teachers from 13 different branches working in primary and secondary schools in Melikgazi District of Kayseri Province in the 2017-2018 academic year and having gifted students in their class were taken as samples. The data collection tool was developed by Tortop (2014), and the Gifted Education Self-efficacy Scale for Teachers (GESST) was used. The scale consists of six sub-dimensions and 26 items. The obtained data were analyzed using SPSS 16 program. Mean data, independent sample t test and chi-square test were used in the interpretation of the data. According to the results of the study, it was determined that the mean scores of teachers' self-efficacy were higher than the average level ( = 3.37). As a result of independent sample t test, no significant difference was found between male and female teachers in terms of sub-dimensions of Gifted Education Self-Efficacy Scale. In the chi-square test, significant differences were found in the gender variable in the academic competency sub-dimension, in the seniority variable in the encouragement of creativity sub-dimension, in the age variable of the teachers in the responsibility competency sub-dimension and in the age variable of the teachers in the instructional planning competency sub-dimension. In the light of the findings, it may be suggested that teachers working with gifted students should be supported continuously by in-service trainings and more self-efficacy related to the education of gifted students within the framework of a certain program, in the light of current data.

Keywords

• gifted students,gifted edication

References

1. ReferencesArmağan, G. (2015) “Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Üstün Yetenekliler Eğitimine İlişkin Tutum ve Öz-yeterliklerinin İncelenmesi”. Üstün Zekalılar Eğitimi ve Yaratıcılık Dergisi, 2(1), 12-16.Dağlı, E. (2014) Üstün Zekalılar Enstitüsü, Geleceğe Açılan Pencere. http://www.ustunzekalilar.org/egitimprogramlari/egitimci-egitimi/79-uestuen-yetenekli- cocuklarn-egitiminde-oegretmenin-rolue.htmlDavis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (1998). Education of the gifted and talented (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and BaconDinçer, S. (2018). “Üstün Zekalı Çocukların Eğitimi İçin 20 Farklı Öneri” kitabı, (sayfa:63-70). Ankara: Gece Akademi.Dixon, F. A., Yssel, N., McConnell, J. M., & Hardin, T. (2014). Differentiated instruction, professional development, and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37(2) 111-127.Ersoy, Ö., ve Avcı, N. (2001). Özel Gereksinimi Olan Çocuklar ve Eğitimleri “Özel Eğitim”, İstanbul : Ya-pa Yayın Pazarlama.Gallagher, S. (2007). Exploring pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards gifted Education’. TalentEd, 25 (1), 11−18.Kulaksızoğlu, A. (2004). Üstün Yetenekli Çocuklar Kongresi Önsözü (Editörler: Adnan Kulaksızoğlu, Ahmet Emre Bilgili, Mustafa Ruhi Şirin) I. Türkiye Üstün Yetenekli Çocuklar Kongresi Üstün Yetenekli Çocuklar Bildiriler Kitabı, İstanbul: Çocuk Vakfı Yayınları, 7–8.Lassig, C. (2003). Teachers’ attitudes towards intellectually gifted children and their education. Unpublished B.Ed. thesis, Griffith University, Nathan, QLD. Lassig, C. (2009). Teachers’ attitudes towards the gifted: The importance of professional development and school culture. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 18(2), 32−42. Lewis, E. & Milton, M. (2005). Attitudes of teachers before and after Professional Development. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 14(1), 5−14.Lewis, J. F. (1982). Bulldozers or chairs? Gifted students describe their ideal teachers. Gifted Child Today, 23, 16-19MEB, Destek Eğitim Odaları(2015).http://meb.gov.trMcCoach, D.B., & Siegel, D. (2007). What predicts teachers’ attitudes toward the gifted?. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(3), 246-254. Mönks, F.J., & Pflüger, R. (2005). Gifted Education in 21 European Countries: Inventory and Perspective. www.bmbf.de/pub/gifted_education_21_eu_countries.pdfRambo, K. E., ve McCoach, D. B. (2012). Teacher attitudes toward subject-specific acceleration: Instrument development and validation. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 35(2), 129152.Siegel, D., Moore, M., Mann, R. L., & Wilson, H. E. (2010). Factors that influence in-service and preservice teachers’ nominations of students for gifted and talented programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 33(3), 337-360.Summak, M.S & Çelik-Şahin Ç. (2014). Bilim ve sanat merkezlerinde yönetici, öğretmen yeterlikleri ve öğretimsel hedefler için standartların belirlenmesi. Üstün Yetenekliler Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 86-104Tortop, H. S., & Dinçer, S. (2016). Destek Eğitim Odalarında Üstün/Özel Yetenekli Öğrencilerle Çalışan Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Uygulama Hakkındaki Görüşleri. Journal of Gifted Education Research, 2016, 4(2), 11-28.Tortop, H.S., & Kunt, K. (2012) İlköğretim öğretmenlerinin üstün yeteneklilerin eğitimine ilişkin tutumlarının incelenmesi, International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(2), 441-451.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, 2(1), 21-3.