Analyzing the Relationship Between Perceived Academic Involvement and School Climate by Gifted Students and Their Science Ability

Abstract

The aim of this study is analyzing, through a theoretical-model, variables that are related in relevant literature with gifted students' abilities in science course. Within that context various analyses have been conducted with respect to environmental, cognitive and affective variables which are linked to students' science ability. In this paper, one of the quantitative research methods, survey method, has been implemented. Data were collected from 997 middle-school level gifted students selected via stratified sampling method from Science and Art Centers across 25 different cities in Turkey. Path analysis was implemented to analyze data. It was determined that if parental and teacher involvement and positive school climate were met; scientific ability, creativity and motivation of gifted students could climb. It was also ascertained that results of implemented path analysis and tested model complied with the data. Thus could be used to explain variables that affected scientific ability, scientific creativity, problem solving and meta-cognitive awareness which are deemed to be related with science ability. It was concluded that approaches of parents, teachers and school administration left remarkable effects on ability development.

Keywords

• academic involvement
• Gifted students
• Science ability
• School climate

References

1. Abel, T., & Karnes, F. A. (1994). Teacher preferences among the lower socioeconomic rural and suburban advantaged gifted students. Roeper Review, 17(1), 52–53.
2. Akkanat, C., & Gokdere, M. (2017). Students' ability in science: Results from a test development study. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 12(1), 14-22.
3. Areepattamannil, S., Freeman, J. G., & Klinger, D. A. (2011). Influence of motivation, self-beliefs, and instructional practices on science achievement of adolescents in Canada. Social Psychology of Education, 14(2), 233-259.
4. Beghetto, R. A. (2007). Factors associated with middle and secondary students’ perceived science competence. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 800–814.
5. Busato, V. V., Prins, F. J., Elshout, J. J., & Hamaker, C. (2000). Intellectual ability, learning style, personality, achievement motivation and academic success of psychology students in higher education. Personality and Individual Differences, 29(6), 1057-1068.
6. Brandwein, P. (1986). A portrait of gifted young with science talent. Roeper Review, 8(4), 235-243.
7. Brandwein, P. F., & Passow, A. H. (1988). Gifted young in science: Potential through performance. National Science Teachers Association, 1742 Connecticut Avenue, NW: Washington DC.
8. Chan, D., Schmitt, N., DeShon, R. P., Clause, C. S., & Delbridge, K. (1997). Reactions to cognitive ability tests: the relationships between race, test performance, face validity perceptions, and test-taking motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 300-310.

9. Chen, S. F., Lin, C. Y., Wang, J. R., Lin, S. W., & Kao, H. L. (2012). A cross-grade comparison to examine the context effect on the relationships among family resources, school climate, learning participation, science attitude, and science achievement based on TIMSS 2003 in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 34(14), 2089-2106.
10. Chi, S., Liu, X., Wang, Z., & Won Han, S. (2018). Moderation of the effects of scientific inquiry activities on low SES students’ PISA 2015 science achievement by school teacher support and disciplinary climate in science classroom across gender. International Journal of Science Education, 40(11), 1284–1304.
11. Colangelo, N., Kerr, B., Christensen, P., & Maxey, J. (1993). A comparison of gifted underachievers and gifted high achievers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37(4), 155-160.
12. Craig, C., Verma, R., Stokes, D., Evans, P., & Abrol, B. (2018). The influence of parents on undergraduate and graduate students’ entering the STEM disciplines and STEM careers. International Journal of Science Education, 40(6), 621-643.
13. Çalık, T., & Kurt, T. (2010). Okul iklimi ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi [Developing the school climate scale]. Eğitim ve Bilim [Education and Science], 35(157), 167-180.
14. DeMars, C. (1999, April). Does the relationship between motivation and performance differ with ability? Paper presented at the meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Montreal, Quebec.
15. Deniş-Çeliker, H., & Balım, A. G. (2012). Bilimsel yaratıcılık ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlama süreci ve değerlendirme ölçütleri. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(2), 1-21.
16. Dündar, Ş. (2014). Algılanan anne-baba ve öğretmen akademik katılım ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(1), 369-382.
17. Enman, M., & Lupart, J. (2000). Talented female students' resistance to science: An exploratory study of post-secondary achievement motivation, persistence, and epistemological characteristics. High Ability Studies, 11(2), 161-178.
18. Gentry, M., Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Choi, B. Y. (2011). Student-identified exemplary teachers: Insights from talented teachers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(2), 111-125.
19. Gonida, E. N., & Cortina, K. S. (2014). Parental involvement in homework: Relations with parent and student achievement‐related motivational beliefs and achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 376-396.
20. Gottfried, A. E., Fleming, J. S., & Gottfried, A. W. (2001). Continuity of academic intrinsic motivation from childhood through late adolescence: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 3-13.
21. Halim, L., Rahman, N. A., Zamri, R., & Mohtar, L. (2018). The roles of parents in cultivating children's interest towards science learning and careers. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 39(2), 190-196.
22. Hill, B. D., Foster, J. D., Sofko, C., Elliott, E. M., & Shelton, J. T. (2016). The interaction of ability and motivation: Average working memory is required for Need for Cognition to positively benefit intelligence and the effect increases with ability. Personality and Individual Differences, 98, 225–228.
23. Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2007). The nature of science education for enhancing scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1347-1362.
24. Horsley, J., & Moeed, A. (2018). ‘Inspire me’-high-ability students’ perceptions of school science. Science Education International, 29(3),163-173.
25. Hu, W., & Adey, P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389-403.
26. Hugerat, M. (2016). How teaching science using project-based learning strategies affects the classroom learning environment. Learning Environments Research, 19(3), 383–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-016-9212-y
27. Jungert, T., & Koestner, R. (2015). Science adjustment, parental and teacher autonomy support and the cognitive orientation of science students. Educational Psychology, 35(3), 361-376.
28. 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.
29. Kiemer, K., Gröschner, A., Pehmer, A.-K., & Seidel, T. (2015). Effects of a classroom discourse intervention on teachers’ practice and students’ motivation to learn mathematics and science. Learning and Instruction, 35, 94–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.10.003
30. Lam, B. T., & Ducreux, E. (2013). Parental influence and academic achievement among middle school students: Parent perspective. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 23(5), 579-590.
31. Lang, Q. C., Wong, A. F., & Fraser, B. J. (2005). Student perceptions of chemistry laboratory learning environments, student–teacher interactions and attitudes in secondary school gifted education classes in Singapore. Research in Science Education, 35(2-3), 299-321.
32. Li, A. K., & Adamson, G. (1995). Motivational patterns related to gifted students' learning of mathematics, science and English: an examination of gender differences. Talents and Gifts, 18(3), 284-297.
33. Little, C. A. (2012). Curriculum as motivation for gifted students. Psychology in the Schools, 49(7), 695-705.
34. Liu, A. S., & Schunn, C. D. (2018). The effects of school-related and home-related optional science experiences on science attitudes and knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(6), 798.
35. Maxwell, S., Reynolds, K. J., Lee, E, Subasic, E., & Bromhead, D. (2017). The impact of school climate and school identification on academic achievement: multilevel modeling with student and teacher data. Frontiers in Psychology, 81-21.
36. Mills, C. J. (2003). Characteristics of effective teachers of gifted students: Teacher background and personality styles of students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(4), 272-281.
37. Mujtaba, T., & Reiss, M. J. (2014). A survey of psychological, motivational, family and perceptions of physics education factors that explain 15-year-old students’aspirations to study physics ın post-compulsory english schools. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(2), 371-393.
38. Nolen, S. B. (2003). Learning environment, motivation, and achievement in high school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 347-368.
39. Ogurlu, U., & Sarıçam, H. (2018). Bullying, forgiveness and submissive behaviors in gifted students. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27(9), 2833-2843.
40. Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2018). The role of the family in talent development. In Handbook of giftedness in children (pp. 129-147). Springer, Cham.
41. Otani, M. (2019). Parental involvement and academic achievement among elementary and middle school students. Asia Pacific Education Review, 1-25.
42. Pamuk, S., Sungur, S., & Oztekin, C. (2017). A multilevel analysis of students’ science achievements in relation to their self-regulation, epistemological beliefs, learning environment perceptions, and teachers’ personal characteristics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(8), 1423-1440.
43. Pelchar, T. K., & Bain, S. K. (2014). Bullying and victimization among gifted children in school-level transitions. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37(4), 319-336.
44. Peterson, J. S. (2000). A follow‐up study of one group of achievers and underachievers four years after high school graduation. Roeper review, 22(4), 217-224.
45. Piccolo, L. R., Merz, E. C., & Noble, K. G. (2018). School climate is associated with cortical thickness and executive function in children and adolescents. Developmental Science, e12719. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12719
46. Ratelle, C. F., Larose, S., Guay, F., & Senécal, C. (2005). Perceptions of Parental Involvement and Support as Predictors of College Students' Persistence in a Science Curriculum. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(2), 286-293.
47. Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational psychologist, 44(3), 159-175.
48. Régner, I., Loose, F., & Dumas, F. (2009). Students’ perceptions of parental and teacher academic involvement: Consequences on achievement goals. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 24(2), 263.
49. Reinhold, S., Holzberger, D., & Seidel, T. (2018). Encouraging a career in science: a research review of secondary schools’ effects on students’ STEM orientation. Studies in Science Education, 54(1), 69-103.
50. Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (1989). Providing challenging programs for gifted readers. Roeper Review, 12(2), 92-97.
51. Renzulli, J. S. (2002). Emerging conceptions of giftedness: Building a bridge to the new century. Exceptionality, 10(2), 67-75.
52. Rinn, A. N., & Bishop, J. (2015). Gifted adults: A systematic review and analysis of the literature. Gifted Child Quarterly, 59(4), 213-235.
53. Rosemarin, S. (2014). Should the teacher of the gifted be gifted?. Gifted Education International, 30(3), 263-270.
54. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2009). Scientific literacy, PISA, and socioscientific discourse: Assessment for progressive aims of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 909-921.
55. Sak, U., Ayas, M. B., Sezerel, B. B., Öpengin, E., Özdemir, N. N., & Gürbüz, S. D. (2015). Gifted and talented education in Turkey: Critics and prospects.Türk Üstün Zekâ ve Eğitim Dergisi, 5(2), 110-132.
56. Serin, O., Serin, N., & Saygılı, G. (2010). İlköğretim düzeyindeki çocuklar için problem çözme envanterinin (ÇPÇE) geliştirilmesi. İlköğretim Online, 9(2), 446-458.
57. Shaunessy-Dedrick, E., Suldo, S. M., Roth, R. A., & Fefer, S. A. (2015). Students' perceptions of factors that contribute to risk and success in accelerated high school courses. The High School Journal, 98(2), 109-137.
58. Sisk, D. A. (1988). The bored and disinterested gifted child: Going through school lockstep. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 11(4), 5-18.
59. Soltani, A. (2018). Influence of motivating science class, family, and peer models on students’ approaches to learning science: A structural equation modeling analysis. Research in Science Education, 50(5), 1665-1687.
60. Sousa, D. A. (2003). How the gifted brain learns. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
61. 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.
62. Stoeger, H., Steinbach, J., Obergriesser, S., & Matthes, B. (2014). What is more important for fourth-grade primary school students for transforming their potential into achievement: the individual or the environmental box in multidimensional conceptions of giftedness?. High Ability Studies, 25(1), 5-21.
63. Şad, S. N. (2012). Investigation of parental ınvolvement tasks as predictors of primary students' Turkish, Math and Science &Technology achievement. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 49, 173-196.
64. Taber, K. S. (2007). Science education for gifted learners?. In K. S. Taber (Ed.), Science Education for Gifted Learners (pp. 1-14). London: Routledge.
65. Taskinen, P. H., Schütte, K., & Prenzel, M. (2013). Adolescents' motivation to select an academic science-related career: the role of school factors, individual interest, and science self-concept. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19(8), 717-733.
66. Tsai, L. T., & Yang, C. C. (2015). Hierarchical effects of school-, classroom-, and student-level factors on the science performance of eighth-grade Taiwanese students. International Journal of Science Education, 37(8), 1166-1181.
67. Tuan, H. L., Chin, C. C., & Shieh, S. H. (2005). The development of a questionnaire to measure students' motivation towards science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 27(6), 639-654.
68. Vialle, W., & Quigley, S. (2002). Does the teacher of the gifted need to be gifted?. Gifted and Talented International, 17(2), 85-90.
69. Wang, M. T., & Eccles, J. S. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement: A longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction, 28, 12-23.
70. Wang, C. L., & Liou, P. Y. (2017). Students’ motivational beliefs in science learning, school motivational contexts, and science achievement in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 39(7), 898-917.
71. Watters, J. J., & Diezmann, C. M. (2003). The gifted student in science: Fulfilling potential. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 49(3), 46-53.
72. Yılmaz, H., & Huyugüzel-Çavaş, P. (2007). Fen öğrenimine yönelik motivasyon ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. İlköğretim Online, 6(3), 430-440.
73. Zimmerman, C. (2000). The development of scientific reasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20(1), 99-149.