Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerde Müfredat Modelleri ve Fen Öğretimi

Hatice Güngör Seyhan; Murat Okur

doi:10.54637/ebad.1085489

Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerde Müfredat Modelleri ve Fen Öğretimi

Öz

Temelde bilişsel etkinliklerde akranlarına göre üstünlüklerinin olmasına vurgu yapılan üstün yeteneklilik ile ilgili tanımlar incelendiğinde çeşitliliğin olduğu görülmektedir. Bir veya daha fazla alanda aynı yaş, deneyim ve çevredeki diğer öğrencilere kıyasla daha yüksek seviyelerde performans gösterme veya gerçekleştirme yeteneğine sahip olmaları “üstün yeteneklilik” olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Bu çalışma, üstün yetenekli öğrenci tanımına giren öğrencilerin genel özellikleri, öğrenme-öğretme ortamlarında nasıl bir müfredat modelleriyle meşgul oldukları, mevcut müfredat modelleri ve içeriği ile bu öğrencilerdeki fen öğretiminin nasıl olması gerektiğine yönelik önerilerin de sunulduğu geleneksel derleme çalışmasıdır. Çalışma sonunda üstün yetenekli öğrencilerde müfredat tasarlama ve geliştirmeye yönelik öneriler verilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kaynakça

Ackerman, P. L. (2014). Adolescent and adult intellectual development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 246–251.
Assouline, S. G., Colangelo, N., VanTassel-Baska, J., ve Lupkowski-Shoplik, A. (2015). A nation empowered: Evidence trumps excuses holding back America’s brightest students. Iowa City: University of Iowa, The Connie Belin ve Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
Ataman, A. (2003). “Üstün zekâlı ve üstün yetenekli çocuklar” (Ed: A. Ataman). Özel gereksinimli çocuklar ve özel eğitime giriş. (S. 173-195). Ankara: Gündüz Eğitim ve Yayıncılık.
Callahan, C. M. (1991). An update on gifted females. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 14, 284-311
Clark, B. (2002). Growing up gifted (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
Clark, B., (2013). Üstün zekâlı olarak büyümek. (F. Kaya ve Ü. Ogurlu, Çeviri Ed.). Ankara: Nobel Akademik.
Collins, M., ve Amabile, T. M. (1999). Motivation and creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 297–312). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., ve Whalen, S. (1993). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Davis, G. A., Rimm, S. B., ve Siegle, D. (2011). Education of the gifted and talented (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Davis, G.A. (2006). Gifted children and gifted education: A practical guide for teacher and parents. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press, Inc.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York, NY: Basic.
Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences (10th Anniversary Ed.). New York, NY: Basic.
Grigorenko, E. L., ve Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Styles of thinking, abilities, and academic performance. Exceptional Children, 63, 295–312.
Hockett, J. A. (2009). Curriculum for highly able learners that conforms to general education and gifted education quality indicators. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 32, 394–440.
Housand, A. M. (2014). [Futurecasting: Defining future attainment aspirations through digital portfolio development]. Unpublished raw data.
Housand, B. C., ve Housand, A. M. (2012). The role of technology in gifted students’ motivation. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 706–715.
Housand, A. M. (2016). In context: gifted characteristics and the implications for curriculum, In Introduction to curriculum design in gifted education (Eds., Stephens, K.R. ve Karnes, F. S.), Prufrock Press Inc.
Kaplan, S. N. (1974). Providing programs for the gifted and talented: A handbook. Ventura, CA: Office of the Ventura County Superintendent of Schools.
Kaplan, S. N. (1986). The grid: A model to construct differentiated curriculum for the gifted. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 180–193). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Kaplan, S. N. (1994). Differentiating the core curriculum to provide advanced learning opportunities. Sacramento, CA: California Association for the Gifted.Maker, C. J., ve Nielson, A. B. (1996). Curriculum development and teaching strategies for gifted learners (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Karamustafaoğlu, S. (2018). 21. Yüzyıl Becerileri ve Fen Öğretimi. Orhan Karamustafaoğlu, Özden Tezel ve Uğur Sarı (Ed.), Güncel Yaklaşım ve Yöntemlerle Etkinlik Destekli Fen Öğretimi içinde (s. 2-20). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
Kaya, N. G. (2013). Üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin eğitimi ve Bi̇lsem’ler. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(1), (115-122).
Keleşoğlu, S., ve Kalaycı, N. (2017). Dördüncü sanayi devriminin eşiğinde yaratıcılık, inovasyon ve eğitim ilişkisi, Yaratıcı Drama Dergisi, 12(1), 69-86.
Little, C. A. (2012). Curriculum as motivation for gifted students. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 695–705.
Marland, S. P., Jr. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented: Report to the Congress of the United States by the U.S. Commissioner of Education and background papers submitted to the U.S. Office of Education, 2 vols. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. (Government Documents Y4.L 11/2:G36)
Matthews, M. S. (2012). Science strategies for students with gifts and talents. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Matthews, M. S. (2016). Science curriculum for gifted learners, In Introduction to curriculum design in gifted education (Eds., Stephens, K.R. ve Karnes, F. S.), Prufrock Press Inc. Memduhoğlu, H.B., Uçar, R., ve Uçar, İ.H. (2017). Örnek Uygulamalarla Eğitimde Yaratıcılık: Yaratıcı Okul Yaratıcı Öğretmen. (s. 2-10). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
Mönks, F. J., ve Katzko, M. W. (2005). Giftedness and gifted education. In R. J. Sternberg ve J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 187–200). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Osborne, J., Simon, S., Christodoulou, A., Howell-Richardson, C., ve Richardson, K. (2013). Learning to argue: A study of four schools and their attempt to develop the use of argumentation as a common instructional practice and its impact on students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 315–347. doi:10.1002/tea.21073
Passow, A. H. (1982). Differentiated curricula for the gifted/talented: A point of view. In S. Kaplan, A. H. Passow, P. H. Phenix, Reis, S. M. (2005). Feminist perspective on talent development: A research-based conception of giftedness in women. In R. J. Sternberg ve J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 217–245). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Reis, S. M., Gubbins, E. J., Briggs, C. J., Schreiber, F. J., Richards, S., Jacobs, J. K., … Renzulli, J. S. (2004). Reading instruction for talented readers: Case studies documenting few opportunities for continuous progress. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 315–338.
Reis, S. M., ve Housand, A. M. (2007). Characteristics of gifted and talented learners: Similarities and differences across domains. In F. A. Karnes ve K. R. Stephens (Eds.), Achieving excellence (pp. 62–81). New York, NY: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60(3), 180.
Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–184, 261.
Renzulli, J. S. (1982). What makes a problem real: Stalking the illusive meaning of qualitative differences in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 298–309.
Renzulli, J. S. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg ve J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 53–92). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Renzulli, J. S. (1996). Schools for talent development: A practical plan for total school improvement. School Administrator, 53(1), 20–22.
Renzulli, J. S. (2002). Emerging conceptions of giftedness: Building a bridge to the new century. Exceptionality, 10(2), 67-75.
Renzulli, J. S. (2002). Expanding the conception of giftedness to include co-cognitive traits and to promote social capital. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(1), 33–40, 57–58.
Renzulli, J. S. (2005). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for promoting creative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg ve J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 246–279). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1985). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Renzulli, J. S., Leppien, J. H., ve Hays, T. S. (2000). The Multiple Menu Model: A practical guide for developing differentiated curriculum. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Renzulli, J. S., Siegle, D., Reis, S. M., Gavin, M. K., ve Sytsma-Reed, R. E. (2009). An investigation of the reliability and factor structure of four new scales for rating the behavioral characteristics of superior students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 21(1), 84–108.
Renzulli, J. S., Smith, L. H., White, A. J., Callahan, C. M., Hartman, R. K., Westberg, K. L., … Sytsma, R. E. (2013). Scales for Rating the Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students (Rev. ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Renzulli, J. S., ve Gubbins, E. F. (2009). Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented. Connecticut: Creative Learning Press, Inc.
Renzulli, J. S., ve Reis, S. M. (2014). The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A how-to guide for talent development (3rd ed.). Waco, TX:Prufrock Press.
Renzulli, J. S., ve Reis, S. M. (2014). The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A how-to guide for talent development (3rd ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Runco, M.A. (1993). Operant theories of insight originality, and creativity. American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 37(1), 54-67.
Reis, S. M. Renzulli, J. S. Sato, I.… V. S. Ward (Eds.) Curricula for the gifted (pp. 4–20). Ventura, CA: National/State Leadership Institute on the Gifted/Talented.
Sampson, V., Enderle, P., ve Grooms, J. (2013). Argumentation in science education: Helping students understand the nature of scientific argumentation so they can meet the new science standards. The Science Teacher, 80(5), 30–33.
Siegle, D., ve McCoach, D. B. (2002). “Promoting a Positive Achievement Attitude with Gifted and Talented Students. “ M. Neihart, S. M. Reis, N. M. Robinson ve S. M. Moon (Ed.) The social and emotional development of gifted children. Washington, DC: National Association of Gifted Children.
Smith, D. L., Smith, L., ve Barnette, J. (1991). Exploring the development of leadership giftedness. Roeper Review, 14, 7–12.
Solomon, P. G. (1998). The curriculum bridge: From standards to actual classroom practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Stahl, R. J. (1994). Achieving targeted student outcomes: An information constructivist (IC) model to guide curriculum and instructional decisions. Journal of Structural Learning, 12(2), 87–111.
Sternberg, R. J. & Lubart, T. (1991). An investment theory of creativity and its Sternberg, R. J. (1997). A triarchic view of giftedness: Theory and practice. In N. Colangelo ve G. A. Davis (Eds.), The handbook of gifted education (pp. 43–53). Boston, MA: Allyn ve Bacon.
Sternberg, R. J. (2005). WICS: A model of giftedness in leadership. Roeper Review, 28, 37–44.
Sternberg, R. J., ve Davidson, J. E. (Eds.). (2005). Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., ve Lubart, T. I. (1993). Creative giftedness: A multivariate investment approach. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 7–15.
Tardif, T. Z., ve Sternberg, R. J. (1988). What do we know about creativity?(Ed. R. J. Sternberg). The nature of creativity. USA: Cambridge University Press. pp. 429-440.
Tomlinson, C. (1997). Good teaching for one and all: Does gifted education have an instructional identity? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 155–174.
Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2005). Quality curriculum and instruction for highly able students. Theory into Practice, 44, 160–166.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2012). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tomlinson, C. A., Kaplan, S. N., Renzulli, J. S., Purcell, J. H., Leppien, J. H., Burns, D. E., … Imbeau, M. B. (2009). The paralel curriculum: A design to develop learner potential and challenge advanced learners (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Uzun, M. (2004). Üstün yetenekli çocuklar el kitabı. İstanbul: Çocuk Vakfı Yayınları
Van Tassel-Baska, J. (July, 2008). What Works in Curriculum for the Gifted (p. 1-20). Asia Pacific Conference on the Gifted: Keynote Address.
VanTassel-Baska, J. (1989). Appropriate curriculum for gifted learners. Educational Leadership, 46(6), 13–15.
VanTassel-Baska, J. (2005). Gifted programs and services: What are the non-negotiables? Theory into Practice, 44, 90–97.
VanTassel-Baska, J. (2011). An introduction to the Integrated Curriculum Model. In J. VanTassel-Baska ve C. A. Little (Eds.), Content based curriculum for high-ability learners (2nd ed., pp. 9–32). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
VanTassel-Baska, J., ve Brown, E. (2007). Toward best practice: An analysis of the efficacy of curriculum models in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 342–358.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ward, V. S. (1980). Differential education of the gifted. Ventura, CA: National/State Leadership Training Institute for the Gifted and Talented.
Westberg, K. L., Archambault, F. X., Dobyns, S. M., ve Salvin, T. J. (1993). An observational study of classroom practices used with third- and fourth-grade students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 120–146.
Westberg, K. L., ve Daoust, M. E. (2003, Fall). The results of the replication of the classroom practices survey replication in two states. The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented Newsletter, 3–8. Retrieved from http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/newsletter/fall03/fall032.html
Yalçın, S. (2019). Öğretmen adaylarının 21. yy. becerilerini ölçmek için kullanabilecekleri araçlar hakkında farkındalıkları ve yeterlik algıları. Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(1), 383-398.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

Türkçe

Konular

Alan Eğitimleri

Bölüm

Derleme

Yazarlar

Hatice Güngör Seyhan ^*
0000-0001-5116-7845
Türkiye

Murat Okur
0000-0003-2502-2276
Türkiye

Yayımlanma Tarihi

21 Mart 2022

Gönderilme Tarihi

10 Mart 2022

Kabul Tarihi

15 Mart 2022

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2022 Cilt: 3 Sayı: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.54637/ebad.1085489

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA84AJ53GS

Kaynak Göster

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Güngör Seyhan, H., & Okur, M. (2022). Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerde Müfredat Modelleri ve Fen Öğretimi. Eğitim Bilim ve Araştırma Dergisi, 3(1), 259-284. https://doi.org/10.54637/ebad.1085489

AMA

1.Güngör Seyhan H, Okur M. Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerde Müfredat Modelleri ve Fen Öğretimi. EBAD. 2022;3(1):259-284. doi:10.54637/ebad.1085489

Chicago

Güngör Seyhan, Hatice, ve Murat Okur. 2022. “Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerde Müfredat Modelleri ve Fen Öğretimi”. Eğitim Bilim ve Araştırma Dergisi 3 (1): 259-84. https://doi.org/10.54637/ebad.1085489.

EndNote

Güngör Seyhan H, Okur M (01 Mart 2022) Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerde Müfredat Modelleri ve Fen Öğretimi. Eğitim Bilim ve Araştırma Dergisi 3 1 259–284.

IEEE

[1]H. Güngör Seyhan ve M. Okur, “Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerde Müfredat Modelleri ve Fen Öğretimi”, EBAD, c. 3, sy 1, ss. 259–284, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.54637/ebad.1085489.

ISNAD

Güngör Seyhan, Hatice - Okur, Murat. “Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerde Müfredat Modelleri ve Fen Öğretimi”. Eğitim Bilim ve Araştırma Dergisi 3/1 (01 Mart 2022): 259-284. https://doi.org/10.54637/ebad.1085489.

JAMA

1.Güngör Seyhan H, Okur M. Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerde Müfredat Modelleri ve Fen Öğretimi. EBAD. 2022;3:259–284.

MLA

Güngör Seyhan, Hatice, ve Murat Okur. “Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerde Müfredat Modelleri ve Fen Öğretimi”. Eğitim Bilim ve Araştırma Dergisi, c. 3, sy 1, Mart 2022, ss. 259-84, doi:10.54637/ebad.1085489.

Vancouver

1.Hatice Güngör Seyhan, Murat Okur. Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerde Müfredat Modelleri ve Fen Öğretimi. EBAD. 01 Mart 2022;3(1):259-84. doi:10.54637/ebad.1085489