Özel Yetenekli Lise Öğrencilerinin Genetik ve Biyoteknoloji Uygulamalarına Yönelik Biyoetik Yaklaşımlarının 21. Yüzyıl Becerileri ve Temel Bilimsel Okuryazarlık Becerileri Açısından İncelenmesi

Öz

Bu çalışmada, özel yetenekli lise öğrencilerinin genetik ve biyoteknoloji uygulamalarına yönelik biyoetik yaklaşımlarının incelenmesi ve bu yaklaşımlarının temel bilimsel okuryazarlık becerileri ve 21. yüzyıl becerileri açısından değişip değişmediğinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla çalışmada nicel araştırma yöntemi ile genel tarama modeli içerisinde yer alan ilişkisel model kullanılmıştır. Çalışma, 2021-2022 eğitim-öğretim yılı güz döneminde İstanbul ili Üsküdar ilçesinde bulunan Araştırma Geliştirme Eğitim ve Uygulama Merkezi Lisesi’ndeki tanılanmış 107 özel yetenekli öğrenci ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmada uygulama için etik izinleri alınan biyoetik yaklaşım ölçeği, temel bilimsel okuryazarlık ölçeği ve 21. yüzyıl becerileri ölçeği uygulanmıştır. Verilerin analizinde betimsel istatistiğin yanı sıra kategorik değişkenler arası ilişkinin var olup olmadığını ortaya koymak üzere ki-kare testi yapılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda, öğrencilerin genetik ve biyoteknoloji uygulamalarının bir kısmında kararsız kaldıkları, buna karşın çoğunlukla destekledikleri belirlenmiştir. Benimsenen biyoetik yaklaşımlara bakılırsa en fazla hak yaklaşımı, ardından yarar yaklaşımı gelmiştir. Bu iki yaklaşımdan sonra ise bilim temelli yaklaşım yer almıştır. Ayrıca öğrencilerin bu yaklaşımları benimsemesinde temel bilimsel okuryazarlık becerileri ile 21. yüzyıl becerilerinin etkisinin bulunduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bu sonuçlara dayanarak özel yeteneklilerin eğitiminde 21. yüzyıl becerileri ile temel bilimsel okuryazarlık becerilerinin dahil edildiği bir öğretimsel modelin geliştirilmesi ile öğretim süreçlerinde genetik ve biyoteknoloji uygulamalarının artırılması gerektiği önerilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Biyoetik
• Özel yetenekli öğrenciler
• Lise
• Bilimsel okuryazarlık
• 21. yüzyıl becerileri

An Investigation of Gifted High School Students’ Bioethical Approaches to Genetics and Biotechnology Applications in terms of 21st Century Skills and Basic Scientific Literacy Skills

Öz

In this study, it is aimed to examine the bioethics approaches of gifted high school students towards genetic and biotechnology applications and to determine whether these approaches have changed in terms of basic scientific literacy skills and 21st century skills. For this purpose, the quantitative research method and the relational model included in the general survey model were used in the study. The study was carried out with 107 gifted students in the Research, Development Education and Application Center High School in Üsküdar, İstanbul, in the fall semester of the 2021-2022 academic year. In the study, the bioethics approach scale, basic scientific literacy scale and 21st century skills scale, for which ethical permissions were obtained, were applied. In the analysis of the data, the chi-square test was used to reveal whether there is a relationship between categorical variables as well as descriptive statistics. As a result of the research, it was determined that the students were undecided in some of the genetic and biotechnology applications, but they mostly supported them. Judging from the bioethical approaches adopted, the right approach was the most followed, followed by the benefit approach. After these two approaches, the science-based approach took place. In addition, it has been concluded that basic scientific literacy skills and 21st century skills have an effect on students' adoption of these approaches. Based on these results, it has been suggested that genetic and biotechnology applications should be increased in teaching processes by developing an instructional model that includes 21st century skills and basic scientific literacy skills in the education of gifted students.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bioethics
• Gifted
• High school
• Scientific literacy
• 21st century skills

Kaynakça

1. Akın, H. (2007). Opinions of Çukurova University Faculty of Arts and Sciences and Faculty of Education students on basic bioethics issues. Çukurova University Institute of Health Sciences, Master Thesis, Adana.
2. Akkanat, H. (2004). Gifted or talented, Ed.: R. Şirin, A. Kulaksızoğlu & A.E. Bilgili, Gifted Children: Selected Articles Book, Children's Foundation Publications: 63, I. Turkey Gifted Children Congress Publication Series: 1, pp.169-192. Istanbul.
3. Alkış, M. (2020). Examining the 21st century skills of university students in terms of some variables. Necmettin Erbakan University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Master Thesis, Konya.
4. Anagun, S. S., Atalay, N., Kılıç, Z., & Yaşar, S. (2016). Developing a scale of 21st century skills proficiency perceptions for teacher candidates: A study of validity and reliability. Pamukkale University Faculty of Education Journal, 40 (40), 160-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.9779/PUJE768.
5. Arslan, A. (2020). Determining the 21st century skills that should be gained to students before and after the pandemic from the perspective of teacher candidates. (Special Issue: Education in Turkey and in the World during the epidemic), Journal of National Education, 553-571.
6. Aygün, S. S., Atalay, N., Kılıç, Z., & Yaşar, S. (2016). Developing a scale of 21st century skills proficiency perceptions for teacher candidates: A study of validity and reliability. Pamukkale University Faculty of Education Journal, 40(40), 160-175.
7. Bakan, İ., & Büyükbeşe, T. (2004). The relationship between job security and general work behavior of employees: A field study. Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 23, 35-59.
8. Bakar, E. (2010). Evaluation of pre-service science teachers' practices and views on bioethics education. Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, PhD Thesis, Ankara.

9. Bakar, M. H. D. (2020). The effect of 21st century skills of social studies teacher candidates on their democratic tendencies (Nevşehir province example). Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University Institute of Social Sciences, Master Thesis, Nevşehir.
10. Bartan, M. (2020). Examination of pre-school teacher candidates' basic scientific literacy levels and scientific attitudes. Pamukkale University Faculty of Education Journal, 49, 293-308.
11. Bozkurt, S. B., & Çakır, H. (2016). Examining the 21st century learning skill levels of secondary school students according to gender and grade level. Pamukkale University Faculty of Education Journal, 39(39), 69-82.
12. Cemaloğlu, N., Arslangilay, A. S., Üstündağ, M. T., & Bilasa, P. (2019). Vocational high school teachers ' perceptions of 21st century skills self-efficacy. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty, 20(2), 845-874.
13. Ceylan, M. (2019). Examining the changing roles of school administrators in the context of 21st century skills according to teachers' views. Trakya University Institute of Social Sciences, Master Thesis, Edirne.
14. Ceylan, O., & Umdu Topsakal, Ü. (2017). Determining the bioethical value perceptions of science teachers. Electronics Studies, 12(6), 137-154.
15. Ceylan, O., & Umdu Topsakal, Ü. (2018). Determination of bioethical perceptions of gifted students . Journal of Education and Training Studies, 6(5), 160-169.
16. Çakır İlhan, A. (2020). Being gifted in Turkey. Child and Civilization, 2,483-494. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.47646 /CMD.2020.219.
17. Çelebi, M., & Sevinç, S. (2019). Determining teachers' perceptions of efficacy regarding 21st century skills and their level of use of these skills. 6th International Congress of Multidisciplinary Studies, 26-27 April 2019, Gaziantep.
18. Çevik, A., & Demirtaş, H. (2021). 21st century skills of school principals from the point of view of school principals and teachers. Journal of İnönü University Faculty of Education, 22(2), 1512-1543.
19. Çevik, M., & Şentürk C. (2019). Multidimensional 21st century skills scale: Validity and reliability study. Cypriot Journal of Education Sciences, 14(1), 11-28.
20. Davaslıgil, Ü. (2009). Education of gifted and talented children. G. Akçamete (Ed.). Students with special needs and special education in general education schools (pp. 545-592). Ankara: Kök Publishing.
21. Deniz, O. (2021). High school biology teachers and bioethics: Awareness, attitudes and teaching practices. İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent University Institute of Educational Sciences, Master Thesis, Ankara.
22. Dinler, H., Simsar, A., & Yalçın, V. (2021). Examining the 21st century skills of 3-6 year old children in terms of some variables. E-Kafkas Journal of Educational Research, 8(2), 281-303.
23. Dombaycı, M. A., & Ercan, O. (2017). Examination of prospective teachers' scientific literacy levels and attitudes towards scientific research in terms of various variables. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 17(3), 1265-1284.
24. Engin, A. O., & Korucuk, M. (2021). Examining students' 21st century skills in terms of various variables. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Education Faculty, 41(2), 1081-1119.
25. Erten, P. (2020). Pre-service teachers' perceptions of 21st century skills competence and their views on gaining these skills. Journal of National Education, 49(227), 33-64.
26. Gokbulut, B. (2020). The relationship between prospective teachers' educational beliefs and 21st century skills. Turkish Studies-Education, 15(1), 127-141.
27. Gulen, S. B. (2013). Examination of secondary school students' 21st century learning skills and support levels with information technologies according to gender and grade level. Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Master Thesis, Ankara.
28. Güngör, M., & Bulut, Y. (2008). On the chi-square test. Fırat University Eastern Anatolia Region Studies, 7(1), 84-89.
29. Gürültü, E., Aslan, M., & Alcı, B. (2020). Secondary school teachers' competencies in using 21st century skills. Hacettepe University Faculty of Education Journal, 35(4), 780-798.
30. Jones, A., McKim, A., & Reiss, M. (2010). Towards introducing ethical thinking in the classroom: Beyond rhetoric edits in ethics in the science and technology classroom. Netherlands: A New Approach to Teaching and Learning, Sense Publisher.
31. Karakaya, F., & Arslan, O. (2016). Students ‘ethical approaches related to animal experiment: 9th grade example. Turkish Journal of Education, 5(4), 208-223. DOI:10.19128/turje.267916.
32. Karakaş, M. M. (2015). Measuring the 21st century science skill levels of middle school eighth grade students. Eskişehir Osmangazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Master Thesis, Eskişehir.
33. Karakitapoğlu, Z. (1996). Contemporary value orientations of adults and university students. Unpublished Master Thesis. Ankara: METU, The Graduate School of Social Sciences. Karasar, N. (2009). Scientific research method. Ankara: Nobel Publishing.
34. Kavak, N., Tufan, Y., & Demirelli, H. (2006). Science and technology literacy and informal science education: The potential role of newspapers. Journal of Gazi Education Faculty, 26(3), 17-28.
35. Keskin Samancı, N. (2009). Developing a bioethical value inventory for secondary school students within the scope of bioethics education. Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, PhD. Thesis, Ankara.
36. Keskin, M. Ö., Keskin Samancı, N., & Kurt, İ. (2013). Examination of pre-service teachers' views on current ethical issues in terms of some variables. Journal of Higher Education & Science, 2, 144-152.
37. Kır Yiğit, M., & Özalemdar, L. (2021). Examining the bioethical values of biology teachers in terms of different variables. Journal of Teacher Education and Training, 2(2), 56-68.
38. Kozikoglu, I., & Altunova, N. (2018). The power of pre-service teachers' self-efficacy perceptions regarding 21st century skills to predict their lifelong learning tendencies. Journal of Higher Education & Science, 3, 522-531.
39. Köktürk, G. V., Üstüner, H., Yılmaz, A., & Özdemir, İ. D (2021). Gifted and community building. Turkish academic research Review, 6(3), 827-862.
40. Kurt, I. (2011). Developing a value inventory for use in the process of discussing value problems posed by the biological sciences. Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Master Thesis, Ankara.
41. McGrew, K. S. (2009). Editorial: CHC theory and the human cognitive abilities project: Standing on the shoulders of the giants of psychometrics intelligence research. Intelligence, 37(1), 1-10.
42. Ministry of National Education (MoNE). (2016). Child development and education, giftedness, special abilities and inclusion. http://www.megep.meb.gov.tr/mte_program_modul/moduller/%C3%9Cst%C3%BCn%20Z ek%C3%A2,%20%C3%96zel%20Talent%20ve%20Resource%C5%9Ft% Retrieved from C4%B1rma.pdf on 10.01.2022.
43. Nacaroğlu, O. (2020). Examination of 21st century skills of gifted and normally developing students. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Education Sciences (JFES), 53(2), 693-722.
44. Orhan-Göksün, D., & Kurt, A. A. (2017). 21st century teacher candidates. learner skills use and 21st century. the relationship between the use of teaching skills. Education and Science, 42(190), 107-130. DOI: 10.15390 /EB.2017.7089.
45. Özdamar, K. (1997). Statistical data analysis with package programs. Eskisehir: Anadolu University Press.
46. Öztaş, G., Çağıl, A. E., & Ayverdi, L. (2020). Examination of high school students' thinking styles and bioethical values in terms of different variables. Journal of Research in Education and Society, 7(1), 167-192.
47. Pieper, A. (1999). Introduction to ethics. (Transl. Atayman, V. & Sezer, G.) First Edition. Istanbul: Details Publications.
48. Sousa, C. (2017). Integrating bioethics in sciences’ curricula using values in science and socioscientific issues. Multidisciplinary Journal for Education, Social and Technological Sciences, 4(1), 122-134.
49. Sternberg, R. J., Jarvin, L. & Grigorenko, E. L. (2011). Explorations in giftedness. New York, N. Y.: Cambridge University press.
50. Surmeli, H. (2008). Evaluation of university students’ attitudes, knowledge and bioethics views about biotechnology and genetic engineering studies. Marmara University Institute of Educational Sciences, Ph.D. Thesis, Istanbul.
51. Sürmeli, H., & Şahin, F. (2010). Bioethical views of university students on genetic engineering: Genetic testing and genetic diagnosis. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7(2), 119-132.
52. Şahin, F., & Ateş, S. (2018). Scientific literacy scale adaptation study for secondary school students. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Education Faculty, 38(3), 1173-1205.
53. Tekin, N. (2013). Examination of the relationship between scientific literacy and critical thinking skills of pre-service science teachers. Necmettin Erbakan University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Master Thesis, Konya.
54. Tekin, N., Aslan, O., & Yağız, D. (2016). Investigation of scientific literacy levels and critical thinking dispositions of pre-service science teachers. Journal of Amasya University Faculty of Education, 5(1), 23-50.
55. Tezel, O., & Tezgören, İ. (2019). Examination of the relationship between the scientific literacy levels of eighth grade students and their problem solving skills. Eskişehir Osmangazi University Turkish World Application and Research Center Education Journal, 4(2), 68-84.
56. Tunc Şahin, C., & Say, Ö. (2010). Examination of scientific literacy levels of primary school students. International Journal of Management, Economics and Business, 6(11), 223-240.
57. Turgut, D. (2018). Examination of pre- service teachers' bioethical values, scientific literacy and empathy skill levels on the basis of classes. Pamukkale University Institute of Educational Sciences, Master Thesis, Denizli.
58. Turgut, H., & Fer, S. (2006). The effect of social constructivist instructional design practice on the development of scientific literacy competencies of pre-service science teachers . Marmara University Atatürk Faculty of Education Journal of Educational Sciences, 24, 205-229.
59. Ulman, Y. I. (2010). Ethics, bioethics, law: Basic concepts and approaches. Acıbadem University Journal of Health Sciences, 1, 1-4.
60. Yaman, H. H. (2011). An example application in argumentation -based bioethics education: Genetically modified organism and genetic screening test. Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Master Thesis, Ankara.
61. Yilmaz, K. (2021). 21st century skills of school principals according to teachers’ opinions. Adnan Menderes University Institute of Social Sciences, Master Thesis, Aydın.
62. Yuce, Z. (2011). Science teacher students' knowledge on biotechnology and bioethical approaches towards biotechnology applications: Attitudes, views and value judgments. Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Ph.D. Thesis, Ankara.
63. Zengin Tepekuyu, H. (2016). Developing bioethics awareness in secondary school 7th grade students. Yıldız Technical University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Master Thesis, Istanbul.
64. Zengin Tepekuyu, H., & Umdu Topsakal, Ü. (2016). Öğrencilerde biyoetik farkındalığı. Proceedings of SOCIOINT 2016 3rd International Conference on Education, Social Sciences and Humanities, 134-142.