The Effect of the Developed Differentiation Approach on the Achievements of the Students

Abstract

Problem Statement: The present study is of importance for designing a differentiation approach, which enables gifted students to use their present potential in mathematics effectively and enables them to develop their achievement, while looking at the effect of the approach on both gifted and non-gifted students. Within the scope of the developed differentiation approach concerning mathematics education of gifted students, the present study is one of the limited studies with such a focus,  which is why it is thought that it will contribute to the literature. By the results of the study, it is of great importance.

Purpose of the Study: The purpose of this research is to determine the effect of a newly-developed differentiation approach for the mathematics education of gifted middle school students on the achievements of both gifted and non-gifted students.

Method: Within the scope of this current study, the model with pre-test and post-test control group among real research models in accordance with quantitative research method was used. The sample of the study was composed of 57 gifted and 60 non-gifted 5th and 6th grade students from a public school and a private school in Maltepe and Cekmekoy districts of Istanbul. Convenience and purposeful sampling were conducted within the scope of quantitative sampling in this study. ‘Mathematics Achievement Test’ and ‘Multiple-Intelligences Domains Inventory’ were used within the scope of this study. The lessons carried out using activities stated in the National Education curriculum about the related subjects were compared with lessons carried out with the activities designed according to the differentiation approach developed in three implementations conducted.

Findings: The research made in private school showed that there is a significant difference between current-enriched and overall scores of gifted students in control and experimental groups after the application on behalf of the experimental group. The research made in the state school showed that there is a significant difference between current-enriched and overall scores of non-gifted students in control and experimental groups after the application on behalf of the experimental group.

Conclusion and Recommendations: There was a significant increase in the achievement scores of experimental group students, where the activities designed according to differentiation approach developed within the scope of this study, when compared with the control group students during all of the implementations. This situation shows that activities and curriculum differentiation studies, which are based on elaboration, creative thinking, and multiple intelligences increase students’ academic achievements. Besides, it is seen that the changes based on creativity strategies on the content, process, product, and learning environments increase students’ academic achievements. The effectiveness of the developed differentiation approach should be researched with different grade levels, on different topics. It is suggested to use developed differentiation approach periodically for teachers and students to gain experience. It is further suggested to inform generally all teachers across the country about how they will guide the process of preparing projects and for teachers to inform their students about how they will prepare projects.

Keywords: Giftedness, teaching mathematics, differentiation, multiple intelligence

Kaynakça

1. References
2. Adodo, S. O. & Agbayewa, C. O. (2011). Effect of Homogenous and Heterogeneous Ability Grouping Class Teaching on Student’s Interest, Attitude and Achievement in Integrated Science. International Journal of Psychology and Counselling, 3(3), 48-54. doi: 10.5897/İJPC.
3. Altinsoy, A. B. (2011). Fen ve Teknoloji Dersinde Coklu Zeka Kuramina Dayali Ogretimin Ogrencilerin Basarilarina Etkisi [The Effect of Teaching Based on Multiple Intelligence Theory In Science and Technology on Students]. (Unpublished master thesis). University of Selcuk/Institute of Educational Sciences, Konya.
4. Al-Zoub, S. M. (2011). The Effect of Enrichment Activities on Talented Students’ Achievement. Modern Journal of Education, Vol.1. No:2/3.
5. Atici, B. & Polat, H. (2010). Web Tasarimi Ogretiminde Proje Tabanli Ogrenme Yaklasiminin Ogrencilerin Akademik Basarisi ve Goruslerine Etkisi [The Effect of Project Based Learning Approach ın Teaching of Web Design on Academic Success and Ideas of Students]. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 1(2), 122-132.
6. Bas, G. & Beyhan, O. (2010). Effects of Multiple Intelligences Supported Project-Based Learning On Students’ Achievement Levels and Attitudes Towards English Lesson. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 2(3), 365-385.
7. Denis Celiker, H. (2012). Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi “Gunes Sistemi ve Otesi: Uzay Bilmecesi” Unitesinde Proje Tabanli Ogrenme Uygulamalarinin Ogrenci Basarilarina, Yaratici Dusunmelerine, Fen ve Teknolojiye Yonelik Tutumlarina Etkisi [The Effect of Project Based Learning Applications in the Unit of “Solar System and Beyond: Space Puzzle” in Science and Technology on Achievement, Creative Thinking, Attitudes towards Science and Technology of Students]. (Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis). University of Dokuz Eylul /Institute of Educational Sciences, Izmir.
8. Fakolade, O. A. & Adeniyi, S. O. (2010). Efficacy of Enrichment Triad and Self-Direct Models on Academic Achievement of G Students in Selected Secondary Schools in Nigeria. International Journal of Special Education, 25(1), 10-16.

9. Gorman, J. C. (2011). The Association Between Grades Pre K-12 Student Achievement And Differentiated Instructional Strategies in the Anytown Township School District Explored Through Units Of Study. (Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis). University of Rowan, USA.
10. Hunt, B. G. & Seney, R. W. (2009). Planning the Learning Environment. In F. A. Karnes, & S. M. Bean (Eds.), Methods and Materials for Teaching the G (pp. 37-72). Waco, Texas: Prufrock.
11. Juter, K. & Sriraman, B. (2011). Does High Achieving In Mathematics= Gifted And/Or Creative In Mathematics. In B. Sriraman, & K. H. Lee (Eds.), The Elements of Creativity and Giftedness in Mathematics (pp. 45-65). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
12. Kadum-Bošnjak, S. & Buršić-Križanac, B. (2012). Impact of Differentiated Instruction on Achievement in Teaching Mathematics to Lower-Stage Grades. Metodički obzori, 7(15), 15-29.
13. Kaplan, A. & Yılmaz H. N. (2015). Coklu Zeka Kuramina Uygun Olarak Hazirlanan Etkinliklerin Ögrencilerin Akademik Basarilarina ve Kaliciliga Etkisi [ ]. Ataturk Universitesi Kazım Karabekir Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 30, 59-70.
14. Kaplan, S. N. (2009). Layering Differentiated Curricula for the Gifted and Talented. In F. A. Karnes, & S. M. Bean (Eds.), Methods and Materials for Teaching the G (pp. 75-106). Waco, TX: Prufrock.
15. Karp, A. (2011). G Education in Russia and the United States. In B. Sriraman, & K. H. Lee (Eds.), The Elements of Creativity and Giftedness in Mathematics (pp. 131-143). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
16. Kasarci, I. (2013). Proje Tabanli Ogrenme Yaklasiminin Ogrencilerin Akademik Basari ve Tutumlarina Etkisi: Bir Meta-Analiz Calismasi [The Effect of Project Based Learning Approach on Academic Success and Attitudes of Students: A Meta-Analysis Study]. (Unpublished Master Thesis). University of Eskisehir Osmangazi/Institute of Educational Sciences, Eskisehir.
17. Korkmaz, H. & Kaptan, F. (2002). Fen Egitiminde Proje Tabanli Ogrenme Yaklasiminin Ilkogretim Ogrencilerinin Akademik Basari, Akademik Benlik Kavrami ve Calisma Surelerine Etkisi [ ]. Hacettepe Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 22, 91-97.
18. Kok, B. (2012). Ustun Zekali ve Yetenekli Ogrencilerde Farklilastirilmis Geometri Ogretiminin Yaraticiliga, Uzamsal Yetenege ve Basariya Etkisi [The Effect of Differentiated Geometry Teaching on Creativeness, Spatial Ability and Achievement of Gifted and Talented Students]. (Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis). University of Istanbul /Institute of Social Sciences, Istanbul.
19. Kurtulus, N. (2012). Yaratici Dusunmeye Dayali Ogretim Uygulamalarinin Bilimsel Yaraticilik, Bilimsel Surec Becerileri ve Akademik Basariya Etkisi [The Effect of Teaching Applications Based on Creative Thinking on Scientific Creativity, Scientific Process Skills and Achievement]. (Unpublished Master Thesis). University of Karadeniz Technical/Institute of Educational Sciences, Trabzon.
20. Leikin, R. & Stanger O. (2011). Teachers’ Images Of Gifted Students and the Roles Assigned To Them In Heterogeneous Mathematics Classes. In B. Sriraman, & K. H. Lee (Eds.), The Elements of Creativity and Giftedness in Mathematics (pp. 29-43). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
21. Luehmann, A. L. (2009). Students’ Perspectives of a Science Enrichment Programme: Out‐of‐school Inquiry as Access. International Journal of Science Education, 31(13), 1831-1855.
22. Mattsson, L. & Bengmark, S. (2011). On Track to Gifted Education In Mathematics In Sweden. In B. Sriraman, & K. H. Lee (Eds.), The Elements of Creativity and Giftedness in Mathematics (pp. 81-101). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
23. McCoach, D. B., Gubbins, E. J., Foreman, J., Rubenstein, L. D., & Rambo-Hernandez, K. E. (2014). Evaluating the Efficacy of Using Predifferentiated and Enriched Mathematics Curricula for Grade 3 Students a Multisite Cluster-Randomized Trial. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58(4), 272-286.
24. MEGEP (Mesleki Egitim ve Ogretim Sisteminin Guclendirilmesi Projesi) (2007). Cocuk Gelisimi ve Egitimi Ustun Zeka ve Ozel Yetenekli Cocuklar. Mili Egitim Bakanligi. Ankara. Retrieved May 20, 2011, from http://cygm.meb.gov.tr/modulerprogramlar/kursprogramlari/cocukgelisim/moduller/ustunzekaveozelyetenekliler.pdf
25. Poonpon, K. (2011). Enhancing English Skills Through Project Based Learning. The English Teacher, XL, 1-10.
26. Preckel, F., Holling, H. & Wiese, M. (2006). Relationship of Intelligence and Creativity in G and Non-G Students: An Investigation of Threshold Theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 159-170.
27. Reis, S. M., McCoach, D. B., Little, C. A., Muller, L. M. & Kaniskan, R. B. (2011). The Effects of Differentiated Instruction and Enrichment Pedagogy on Reading Achievement in Five Elementary Schools. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 462–501.
28. Renzulli, J. S. & Reis, S. M. (2008a). Challenging All Students With a Continuum of Enrichment Services. In Enriching Curriculum For All Students (pp. 35-53). Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
29. Renzulli, J. S. & Reis, S. M. (2008b). Enrichment Learning and Teaching. In Enriching Curriculum For All Students (pp. 103-130). Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
30. Saban, A. (2005). Çoklu Zeka Teorisi ve Eğitim. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
31. Simpkins, P. M., Mastropieri, M. A. & Scruggs, T. E. (2009). Differentiated Curriculum Enhancements in Inclusive Fifth-Grade Science Classes. Remedial and Special Education, 30(5), 300-308.
32. Singh, P. (2013). Accounting Enrichment Program for Gifted High School Pupils: Self-Regulated Learning Strategies to Develop Our Future Business Leaders. International Business & Economics Research Journal (IBER), 12(1), 103-112.
33. Tabuk, M. (2009). Proje Tabanli Ogrenmede Coklu Zekâ Yaklasiminin Matematik Ogrenme Basarisina Etkisi [The Effect of Multiple Intelligence Approach in Project Based Learning on Achievement of Mathematics Learning]. (Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis). University of Marmara/Institute of Educational Sciences, Istanbul.
34. Tomlinson, C. A. (2000). What Is Differentiated Instruction? Retrieved September 2, 2013, from
35. http://www.roe11.k12.il.us/GES%20Stuff/Day%204/Content/Differentiation%20Packet-Combined.pdf
36. Uzunoz, A. & Akbas, Y. (2011). Cografya Dersinde Coklu Zekâ Destekli Ogretimin Ogrenci Basarisi ve Kaliciliga Etkisi [The Effect of Multiple Intelligence Based Learning on Achievement and Memorability of Students]. Turk Egitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 9(3), 467-496.
37. VanTassel-Baska, J. & Brown, E. (2009). An Analysis of Gifted Education Curriculum Models. In F. A. Karnes, & S. M. Bean (Eds.), Methods and Materials for Teaching the G (pp. 75-106). Waco, TX: Prufrock.
38. Yalmanci, S. G. & Gozum, A. I. C. (2013). The Effects of Multiple Intelligence Theory Based Teaching on Students’ Achievement and Retention of Knowledge (Example of The Enzymes Subject). International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 4(3), 27-36.
39. Yılmaz, F. N. (2015). Fen Bilimleri Ögretiminde Proje Tabanli Ögrenme Yaklasiminin 6. Sinif Ögrenci Basarisi ve Bilimsel Sürec Becerilerine Etkisi [ The Effect of Project Based Learning Approach in Science Teaching on Achievement and Scientific Process Skills of 6th Grade Student]. (Unpublished Master Thesis). University of Pamukkale/Institute of Educational Sciences, Denizli.