A Comparison of Parents of Gifted Students and Non-Gifted Students: A Case of Expectations from Mathematics Education

Öz

In this study, the purpose was to find out and conduct comparisons among expectations of the gifted and non-gifted student parents’ from mathematics education. This study was designed as a descriptive study and conducted by using a descriptive research design. During 2017-2018 academic year, a total of 293 parents (126 parents of the gifted students and 167 parents of the non-gifted students) participated in this study. The information on the expectations of gifted student parents’ were collected from two different SACs, whereas the data on the non-gifted student parents were collected from two middle schools. The collected data were analyzed using the SPSS 18.00 package program. The findings inducated that the expectations of gifted and non-gifted students’ parents did not differ according to the type of parent (i.e., mother, father, other). Morever, in comparison to the parents of the non-gifted students, the parents of the gifted students did not expect much of the “Authority and Rule-Oriented Teaching” in terms of mathematics education. When comparing the expectations of parents' in general, there is no statistically significant difference identified between parents' expectations from the “Conceptual Understanding and Active Student.”

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Expectations from mathematics education,Parents,Gifted students,Non-Gifted students

Üstün Yetenekli Öğrenci Velileri ile Üstün Yetenekli Tanısı Koyulmamış Öğrenci Velilerinin Karşılaştırılması: Matematik Eğitiminden Beklenti Örneği

Öz

Yapılan bu çalışmada velilerin önemi doğrultusunda üstün yetenekli ve üstün yetenekli tanısı konulmamış öğrenci velilerinin matematik eğitiminden beklentileri ortaya çıkarılarak karşılaştırılmaya çalışılmıştır. Araştırmada genel tarama modellerinden betimsel araştırma modeli kullanılmıştır. Araştırmaya 2017-2018 eğitim öğretim yılında 126’sı üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin, 167’si üstün yetenekli tanısı konulmamış öğrencilerin velisi olmak üzere toplam 293 veli katılmıştır. Üstün yetenekli öğrenci velilerine ilişkin veriler iki farklı Bilim Sanat Merkezi’nden, üstün yetenekli tanısı konulmamış öğrenci velilerine ilişkin veriler ise iki ortaokuldan toplanmıştır. Araştırmanın verileri SPSS 18.00 paket programı kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular incelendiğinde; beklentilerin hem üstün yetenekli öğrenci velilerinde hem de diğer velilerde veli türüne (anne, baba, diğer) göre farklılık göstermediği bulunmuştur. Bir diğer analizde ise üstün yetenekli öğrenci velilerinin diğer öğrenci velilerinden daha düşük öğretmenin otorite olduğu ve kural ağırlıklı bir öğretim beklentisine sahip olduğu belirlenmiştir. Öğrenci velilerinin beklentileri genel olarak karşılaştırıldığında velilerin kavramsal anlama ve öğrencinin aktif olduğu öğretim beklentilerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılığın olmadığı görülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Matematik eğitiminden beklentiler,Veliler,Üstün yetenekli öğrenciler,Üstün yetenekli tanısı konulmamış öğrenciler

Kaynakça

1. Ablard, K. E., & Parker, W. D. (1997), Parents’ achivement goals and perfectionisim in their academically talented children. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 26(6), 651-667.
2. Açıkalın, A. (1989). Organizational and managerial dimensions of expectation of parents in private and state high schools. Hacettepe University Journal of Education (HUJE), 4(4), 85-91.
3. Akbaşlı, S., & Kavak Y. (2008). Ortaöğretim okullarındaki okul aile birliklerinin görevlerini gerçekleştirme düzeyleri. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 19, 1-21.
4. Aktepe, V., & Aktepe, L. (2009).Teaching method using science and technology education on students’ aspects: The example of Kırsehir CAS. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty (JKEF), 10(1), 69-80.
5. Altun, A. S. (2009). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin akademik başarısızlıklarına ilişkin veli, öğretmen ve öğrenci görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Elementary Education Online, 8 (2), 567-586.
6. Arslan, M. (2007). Eğitimde yapılandırmacı yaklaşımlar. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(1), 41-61.
7. Ateş, H., & Durmaz, S. (2016). Investigation of pre-service science teachers’ selfworth beliefs in terms of some variables. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty (JKEF), 17(1), 517-533.
8. Aytekin, C., Baltaci, S., Altunkaya, B., Kiymaz, Y., & Yildiz, A. (2016). Matematik eğitimi veli beklenti ölçeği'nin geliştirilmesi (MEVBÖ): Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty (JKEF), 17(3), 397-411.

9. Balli, J. S., Demo, H. D., & Wedman, F. J. (1998). Family involvement with children’s homework: An intervention in the middle grades. Family Relations, 47, 149-157.
10. Baltaci, S., Yıldız, A., & Güven, B. (2014). Knowledge types used by eighth grade gifted students while solving problems. Mathematics Education Bulletin, 28(50), 1032-1056.
11. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-Efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychogical Review, 84 (2), 191-215.
12. Blanden, J., & Gregg, P. (2004). Family income and educational attainment: A review of approaches and evidence for Britain. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 20(2), 245-263.
13. Booth, A.,& Dunn, J. F. (1996). Family-school links: How do they affect educational outcomes? Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Boran, A.İ., & Aslaner, R. (2008). Problem-based learning in teaching mathematics at the science-art centers. İnönü University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 9(15), 15-32.
15. Cai, J., Moyer, J. C., & Wang, N. (1999). Parental roles in students' learning of mathematics: An exploratory study. Research in Middle Level Education Quarterly, 22, 1-18.
16. Cai, J. (2003). Investigating parent al roles in students' learning of mathematics from a cross-national perspective. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 15(2), 87- 106.
17. Chen, M., & Fan, X. (2001). Parental involvement and students’ academic achievement: A metaanalysis. Educational Psychology Review, 13 (1), 1-22.
18. Chevalier, A., & Lanot, G. (2002). The relative effect of family characteristics and financial situation on educational achievement. Education Economics, 10 (2), 165– 181.
19. Chiu, M.M., & Xihuaa, Z. (2008). Family and motivation effects on mathematics achievement: Analyses of students in 41 countries. Learning and Instruction, 18 (4), 321-336.
20. Çelenk, S. (2003). Okul başarısının ön koşulu: Okul aile dayanışması. İlköğretim- Online, 2 (2), 28-34.
21. DeRoche, E. F., & Williams, M. M. (1998). Educating hearts and minds: A comprehensive character education framework. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
22. Deur, P. V. (2011). Views of gifted elementary students about self-directed learning, Gifted and Talented International, 26 (1-2), 111-120.
23. Eccles, J. S., & Harold, R. D. (1993). Parent-school involvement during the early adolescent years. Teachers College Record, 94, 568-568.
24. Freeman, J. (2000). ‘Families, the essential context for gifts and talents’, (pp. 573-585) in K.A. Heller, F.J. Monks, R. Sternberg & R. Subotnik, International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
25. Ganzach, Y. (2000). Parents’ education, cognitive ability, educational expectations and educational attainment: Interactive effects. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 419-41.
26. Hakkinen, I., Kirjavainen, T., & Uusitalo, R. (2003). School resources and student achievement revisited: New evidence from panel data. Economics of Education Review, 22, 329–335.
27. Hatch, T. (1998). How community action contributes to achievement. Educational Leadership, 55(8), 16-19.
28. Henderson, A. T. & Berla, N. (2004). A new generation of evidence: The family is critical to student achievement. Washington DC: National Committee for Citizens in Education.
29. Heyneman, S. P., & Loxley, W. A. (1983). The effect of primary school quality on academic achievement across 29 high- and low-income countries. American Journal of Sociology, 88 (6), 1162–1194.
30. Holton, D., & Gaffney, M. (1994). Teaching talented students. In J. Neyland (Eds.), Mathematics education: A handbook for teacher, (pp. 397- 409). Wellington, New Zealand: Wellington College of Education.
31. Horn, C. (2002). Raising expectations of children from poverty. Gifted Education Press Quarterly, 16 (4), 2-5.
32. Jacobson, A. L., & Engelbrecht, J. (2000). Parenting education needs and preferences of parents of young children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 28(2), 104-116.
33. Jeynes, W. H. (2005). Parental involvement and student achievement: A meta analysis. Downloaded from: http://www.hfrp.org/publications.resources/browseourpublications/parental-involvement-and-studentachievement-a-meta-analysis.
34. Karaca, D., & Gür, H. (2004).Participation of families in rural and urban areas in teaching mathematics. Balıkesir University. V. Science and Mathematics Education Congress, http://old.fedu.metu.edu.tr/ufbmek-5/b_kitabi/PDF/Matematik/Bildiri/t237d.pdf. Retrieved date: 20.12.2017.
35. Karasar, N. (2006). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi (9. Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
36. Keith, T. Z., Keith, P. B., Troutman, G. M., Bickley, P., Trivette, P. S., & Singh, K. (1993). Does parental involvement affect eighth grade student achievement? Structural analysis of national data. School Psychology Review, 22, 474–496.
37. Kotaman, H. (2008). Levels of involvement of Turkish parents in their education. Journal of Uludag University Faculty of Education, 21 (1), 135-149.
38. Kutluca, T., & Aydın, M. (2010). Interest, attitudes and support towards families’ mathematics education. Family and Society. Journal of Education Culture and Research, 11(6), 65-78.
39. Lansford, J. E., Godwin, J., Al-Hassan, S. M., Bacchini, D., Bornstein, M. H., Chang, L., & Zelli, A. (2018). Longitudinal associations between parenting and youth adjustment in twelve cultural groups: Cultural normativeness of parenting as a moderator. Developmental Psychology, 54(2), 362-377.
40. Maryland, M. (1972). Education of gifted and talented. Washington D.C: US Office of Education.
41. McLoughlin, J. A., & Lewis, R. B. (2008). Assessing students with special needs (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Publishing Company.
42. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB] (2017). Öğretim programları. http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/Veliler.aspx sitesinden alınmıştır.
43. Miller, R. C. (1990). Discovering mathematical talent. (ERIC Digest No. E482) ERIC Clearinghouse on Handicapped and Gifted Children Reston VA.
44. Nyabuto, A. N., & Njoroge P. M. (2014). Parental involvement on pupils' performance in mathematics in public primary schools in Kenya. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 4(1), 19-26.
45. Öksüz, C. (2010). Seventh grade gifted students’ misconceptions on “Point, line and plane” concepts, Elementary Education Online, 9(2), 508-525.
46. Özbaş, M., & Badavan, Y. (2009). İlköğretim okulu yöneticilerinin okul-aile ilişkileri konusunda yapmaları gereken ve yapmakta oldukları işler. Eğitim ve Bilim, 34, 69-81.
47. Özcan, B. N. (2016). İnvestigation of parents’ beliefs and participation in their children’s math learning process. The Journal of International Education Science, 3(8), 105-117.
48. Özen Altınkaynak, Ş., & Yanıklar, C. (2014). Anne ve babaların okul öncesi eğitime devam eden çocuklarının gelişimine yönelik beklentileri. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30, 56-72.
49. Pena, D. (2000). Parent involvement: Influencing factors and implications. The Journal of Educational Research, 94 (1), 42-54.
50. Pezdek, K., Berry, T., & Renno, P. A. (2002). Children's mathematics achievement: The role of parents' perceptions and their involvement in homework. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 771.
51. Phillips, M., Brooks-Gunn, J., Duncan, G. J., Klebanov, P., & Crane, J. (1998). Family background, parenting practices, and the Black–White test score gap. Washington, D.C.,Brooking Institution Press. Public and Private schools in Karani Location in Kikuyu Division, Kiambu.
52. Pourselami, A., Erfani, N., & Firoozfar, I. (2013). Mathematics anxiety, mathematics performance and gender differences among undergraduate students. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publication, 3(7), 1- 6.
53. Ravenna, G. (2008). Factors influencing gifted students' preferences for models of teaching. Southern California: University of Southern California.
54. 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.
55. Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1985). The schoolwide enrichhment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center,CT: Creative Learning Press.
56. SAC Guideline (2007). Science Art Centers (SAC) directive. Ministry of Nacional Education, Turkey.
57. Schickedanz, J. A. (2003). Family socialization and academic achievement. Journal of Education, 1, 17-34.
58. Seyfullahoğulları, A. (2012). A research study on the expectations of parent from kindergartens. The Journal of Marmara Social Research, 2, 1-15.
59. Sisk, D. A. (1990). The state of gifted education: Toward a bright future. Music Educators Journal, 76 (7), 35–39.
60. Sivaci, S. Y. (2017). Examining primary education senior students’ field knowledge competence and attitudes towards mathematic: A comparative research. International Journal of Eurasia Social Sciences, 8(26), 224-225.
61. Sheffıeld, L. J. (2003). Extending the challenge in mathematics: Developing mathematical promise in K–8 students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
62. Sowell, E. J., Zeigler, A. J., Bergwell, L., & Cartwright, R. M. (1990). Identification and description of mathematically gifted students: A review of empirical research. Gifted Child Quarterly, 34, 147-154.
63. Şahin, F. T., & Özbey, S. (2009). The place and ımportance of father ınvolvement at family ınvolvement studies applied at the preschool education program. Family and Society. Journal of Education Culture and Research, 5(17), 30-39.
64. Şen, H. Ş., & Gülcan, M. G. (2012). Parent’s opinions about the homework set for 4th and 5th grades of the primary school. The Journal of the Industrial Arts Education Faculty of Gazi University, 29, 29-41.
65. Thomson, S., Lokan, J., Lamb S., & Ainley, J. (2003). Lessons from the third international mathematics and science study. Australian Council for Educational Research (ACEReSearch), 9.
66. Tokuç, H. (2007). Anne ve babaların okul öncesi eğitim hakkındaki görüş ve beklentilerinin incelenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
67. Tozlu, N. (2004). Turkey's center (axis) a discussion on the education of gifted and talented in being a force. Gifted Children Proceedings Book Children's Foundation Publications, İstanbul. Turkey.
68. Uzun, M. (2004). Gifted children handbook. Children's Foundation Publications, İstanbul. Turkey.
69. Xu, J., & Corno, L. (2003). Family help and homework management reported by middle school students. The Elementary School Journal, 103, 503-517.
70. Yetkin, D., & Daşcan, Ö. (2008). İlköğretim programı. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
71. Yildiz, A., Baltaci, S., Kurak, Y., & Güven, B. (2012). Examining the usage of problem-solving strategies by the eighth grade gifted and non-gifted students. Journal of Uludag University Faculty of Education, 25(1), 123-143.
72. Zakaria, E., & Nordin, N. M. (2008). The effects of mathematics anxiety on matriculation students as related to motivation and achievement. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(1), 27-30.
73. Zengin, B., & Seven, A. M. (2007). İkinci dil öğrenme stratejileri ve algılama farklılıkları. Erzincan Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(2), 99-109.