ISSUE OF IN-SERVICE TRAINING OF THE TEACHERS ASSIGNED IN SCIENCE AND ART CENTERS

Yıl 2016, Sayı: 42, 59 - 73, 01.12.2016

İsmail Satmaz , İlke Evin Gencel

Öz

The aim of the study was to determine the
opinions of the teachers who serve in the newly opened Science and Art Centers
(SAC) where gifted students attend, about in-service training. The participant
of the study consisted of 30 teachers in different branches who are assigned in
Canakkale, Aydın, Bandırma, Batman, Bolu, Adıyaman, Konya Selçuklu SAC that
enrolled the students in the academic year of 2014-2015 for the first time. The
phenomenological method was used which is the one of the qualitative research
methods. The data have been obtained via semi-structured interviews and were
analyzed with the inductive content analysis. The data were coded by using
Nvivo 10. In accordance with the findings, the participants’ expectations and
problems through in-service training process were revealed and some suggestions
were developed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

science and art centers, gifted students, gifted students education, in-service training

BİLİM SANAT MERKEZLERİNDE GÖREVLENDİRİLEN ÖĞRETMENLERİN HİZMET İÇİ EĞİTİM SORUNU

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı üstün yetenekli
öğrencilerin eğitim aldığı, yeni açılan Bilim Sanat Merkezlerinde (BİLSEM)
görev yapan öğretmenlerin hizmet içi eğitim sorunu ilgili görüşlerini
belirlemektir. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu, 2014-2015 eğitim-öğretim yılında
ilk defa öğrenci alan Çanakkale, Aydın Ticaret Borsası, Bandırma, Batman, Bolu,
Adıyaman, Konya Selçuklu BİLSEM’lerde görevlendirilen farklı branşlardaki 30 öğretmen
oluşturmuştur. Nitel araştırma yöntemiyle gerçekleştirilen çalışmada veriler
yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme tekniği ile toplanmıştır. Veriler NVivo 10 nitel
veri analizi paket programından yararlanılarak çözümlenmiştir. Bulgular
doğrultusunda yeni açılan BİLSEM’lerde görevli öğretmenlerin hizmet içi eğitim sürecinden
beklentileri ve yaşanan sorunlar ilişkin görüşleri ortaya konarak ve çözüm
önerileri geliştirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

bilim ve sanat merkezleri, üstün yetenekliler, üstün yetenekli eğitimi, hizmet içi eğitim

Kaynakça

• Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A Taxonomy For Learning, Teaching, And Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. NY:Longman.
• Blumen Pard, S. (2002) Effects of a Teacher Training Workshop on Creativity, Cognition,and School Achievement in Gifted and Non-gifted Second-grade Students in Lima, Peru, High Ability Studies, 13:1, 47-58.
• Chan, D. W. (2001). Characteristics and Competencies of Teachers of Gifted Learners: The Hong Kong perspective. Roeper Review, 23 (4), 197-202.
• Clark, B. (2002). Growing up Gifted: Developing the Potential of Children at Home and at School (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
• Colangelo, N. & Davis, G. A. (2003). Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.
• Colangelo, N., & Davis, G. A. (2003). Introduction and overview. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed.) (pp. 3-10). Boston: Pearson Education.
• Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Fiedler, E.D., Lange, R.E. & Winebrenner, S. (2002). Insearch of reality: Unraveling the myths about tracking, ability grouping, and the gifted. Roeper Review, 24(3), 108-111.
• Fraser-Seeto, K. T., Howard, S. J., & Woodcock, S. (2015). An Investigation of Teachers' Awareness and Willingness to Engage with a Self-Directed Professional Development Package on Gifted and Talented Education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(1), 1-14.
• Gagne, F. (2010). Motivation within the DMGT 2.0 framework. High Ability Studies, 1(2), 81- 99.
• Geake, J. G. & Gross, M.U.M. (2008). Teachers' Negative Affect Toward Academically Gifted Students, Gifted Child Quarterly 52 (3), 217-231.
• George, D. (2003). Gifted education: Identification and provision (2nd ed.). London: David Fulton Publishers.
• Gross, M. U. M. (2005). Exceptionally Gifted Children. London and New York: Routledge Falmer.
• Harris, D. N. & Sass, T. R. (2011). Teacher tarining, teacher quality and student achievement. Journal of Public Economics. 95, 798-812.
• Horn, C. (2002). "Raising expectations of children from poverty". Gifted Education Press Quarterly, 16(4), 2-5.
• Jacob, B. & Lefgren, L. (2004). The impact of teacher training on student achievement: quasiexperimental evidence from school reform efforts in Chicago. Journal of Human Resources, 39 (1), 50-79.
• Kaplan, S. (2005). Layering differentiated curricula fort he gifted and talented. In F. Karnes & S. Bean (Eds.), Methods and materials for teaching the gifted (107-132). TX:Prufrock Press.
• Kogan, N. (1995). Motivational and personality patterns in performing artists. Paper presented at the Esther Katz Rosen Symposium on the Psychological Development of Gifted Children, Lawrence, KS.
• Laine, S., Kuusisto, E. & Tirri, K. (2016). Finnish teachers' conceptions of giftedness. Journal fort he Education of the Gifted, 39 (2) 151-167.
• Lassig, C. J. (2003) Gifted and talented education reforms: Effects on teachers' attitudes. In Bartlett, B. and Bryer, F. and Roebuck, D., Eds. Proceedings 1st Annual International Conference on Cognition, Language, and Special Education Research: Reimagining Practice: Researching Change 2, pages pp. 141-152, Surfers Paradise, Australia.
• McCoach, D. B. (2007). What predicts teachers' attitudes toward the gifted?. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(3), 246-255. McDaniel, T.R. (2002). Mainstreaming the gifted: Historical perspectives on excellence and equity. Roeper Review, 24, 112-115.
• Mills, C. J. (2003). Characteristics of Effective Teachers of Gifted Students: Teacher Background and Personality Styles of Students. G i f t e d C h i l d Q u a r t e r l y, 47 (4), 272-281.
• Mishal, A. & Patkin, D. (2016) Contribution of mathematics in-service training course to the professional development of elementary school teachers in Israel, Teacher Development, 20:2, 253-274.
• MEB. (2007). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Bilim ve Sanat Merkezleri Yönergesi, 10.03.2015 tarihinde "http://orgm.meb.gov.tr/" adresinden alınmıştır.
• MEB. (2010). Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı İç Denetim Birimi Başkanlığı Bilim ve Sanat Merkezleri Süreci (Üstün Yetenekli Bireylerin Eğitimi) İç Denetim Raporu, http://icden.meb.gov.tr/digeryaziler/ Bilim Sanat Merkezleri Ic Denetim Ra.pdf, Web adresinden 10.03.2015 tarihinde alınmıştır.
• Milne, H. & Reis, S. (2000). Using video therapy to address the social and emotional needs og gifted children. Gifted Child Today, 23 (1), 24-29.
• Moon, S. (Ed). (2004). GCQ seminal articles. Socio-emotional issues, underachievement, counseling of gifted and talented students. Thousands Oaks,CA: Corwin Press. Muijs, D. (2004). Doing Quantitative Research in Education with SPSS. Sage Publications, London.
• O'Sullivan, M. 2004. "The Reconceptualisation of Learner-centred Approaches: A Namibian Case Study." International Journal of Educational Development 24 (6): 585- 602.
• Özen, R. & Nartgün, Ş.S. (2005). Perceptions of primary schools teachers in relation to the effects of inservice training programs. Paper presented at the International Conference on the subject of Lifelong Learning in the Balkans: A Historical Context and Current Trends" held in 1st-3rd, July, 2005, Belgrade.
• Özer, B. (2004). Öğretmenlerin hizmetiçi eğitimi: Katılma durumları, beklentileri ve engelleri. XIII. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kurultayı, 06-09 Temmuz, Malatya, Bildiri Özeti Kitapçığı, PegemA, 68-69.
• Parmaksız, R. & Sıcak, A. (2015). Uzaktan hizmetiçi eğitime ilişkin öğretmen görüşleri. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8 (4), 187-212.
• Peterson, J. S. (2003). An argument for proactive attention to affective concerns of gifted adolescents. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14, 62-71.
• Renzulli, J. S. (2004). Introduction to identification of students for gifted and talented programs. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Identification of students for gifted and talented programs (pp. xxiiixxxiv). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
• Renzulli, J. S. (2012). Reexamining the role of gifted education and talent development for the 21st century: A four- part theoretical approach. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56, 150-159.
• Renzulli, J.S.&Gaesser, A. H. (2015). A Multi Criteria System For the Identification of High Achieving and Creative/ProductiveGiftedness http://gifted.uconn.edu/schoolwideenrichmentmodel/high_achieving_creative-productive_giftedness/adresinden 10.03.2016 tarihinde alındı.
• Rogers, K. B. (2007). Lessons learned about educating the gifted and talented: A synthesis of research on educational practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(4), 382-396.
• Sharma, U. & Sokal, L. (2015). The impact of teacher education course on preservice teacers' beliefs about inclusion: and international comparison. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs. 15 (4), 276-284.
• Tebliğler Dergisi. (2001). Bilim Sanat Merkezleri Yönergesi, Sayı: 2530, Cilt: 64. Tomlinson, C.A., & Allan, S.D. (2000). Leadership for differentiating schools and classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• VanTassel-Baska, J., Avery, L.D., Little, C., &Hughes, C. (2000). An evaluation of the implementation of curriculum innovation: The impact of the William and Mary units on schools. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 244-272.
• VanTassel-Baska, J., & Stambaugh, T. (2006). Comprehensive curriculum for gifted learners (3rd. ed.), Boston, Allyn&Bacon.
• Van Tassel-Baska, J. & Johnsen, S. K. (2007). Teacher education standards fort he field of gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51 (2), 182-205.
• Vialle, W., & Quigley, S. (2002). Does the teacher of the gifted need to be gifted?. Gifted and Talented International, 17(2), 85-90.
• Wayne, A. J. & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristic s and student achievement gains. Review of Educational Research, 73 (1), 89-122.