Examining the Logical Thinking Skills of Gifted 5th Grade Students

Öz

21st-century societies expect individuals to have critical, creative, systematic, reflective, analytical, in-depth, and logical thinking skills. Gifted students who play a role in the development of the societies in which they live are expected to have advanced logical reasoning skills. Therefore, in this study, the logical reasoning skills of gifted students were examined. The research is a descriptive study within the scope of general survey models. In this study, easily accessible sampling method, which is one of the convenient sampling methods, was preferred. The participants of the study are composed of 41 fifth-grade students in a center where gifted students are educated. As a data collection tool, "The Longeot's Test of Cognitive Development” was used. Nonparametric analysis methods were used in data analysis. The majority of the gifted students are in the formal stage. There is no significant difference in terms of gender between the scores of the general, concrete, and formal stages of gifted students. The results obtained were discussed by considering other studies in the literature. The study was completed by making various suggestions for researchers and teachers. It has been suggested to give more space to educational activities that will develop the logical thinking skills of gifted students.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Cognitive development
• gifted student
• logical thinking
• Longeot

Özel Yetenekli 5. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerinin İncelenmesi

Öz

21. yüzyıl toplumları bireylerin eleştirel, yaratıcı, sistematik, yansıtıcı, analitik, derinlemesine ve mantıklı düşünme becerilerine sahip olmasını bekler. Yaşadıkları toplumların gelişiminde rol oynayan özel yetenekli öğrencilerin gelişmiş mantıksal düşünme becerilerine sahip olmaları beklenir. Bu nedenle bu çalışmada özel yetenekli öğrencilerin mantıksal düşünme becerileri incelenmiştir. Araştırma, genel tarama modelleri kapsamında betimsel bir çalışmadır. Bu çalışmada, uygun örnekleme yöntemlerinden kolay ulaşılabilir örnekleme yöntemi tercih edilmiştir. Araştırmanın katılımcıları özel yetenekli öğrencilerin eğitim gördükleri bir merkezdeki 41 beşinci sınıf öğrencisinden oluşmaktadır. Veri toplama aracı olarak "Longeot Bilişsel Gelişim Testi" kullanılmıştır. Veri analizinde parametrik olmayan analiz yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Özel yetenekli öğrencilerin büyük çoğunluğunun bilişsel gelişimi soyut işlemler aşamasındadır. Özel yetenekli öğrencilerin genel, somut ve soyut işlem aşamalarından aldıkları puanlar arasında fark yoktur. Elde edilen sonuçlar literatürdeki diğer çalışmalar dikkate alınarak tartışılmış, araştırmacı ve öğretmenler için çeşitli önerilerde bulunarak çalışma tamamlanmıştır. Elde edilen bu bulgular literatürdeki çeşitli araştırmalarla karşılaştırılmıştır. Özel yetenekli öğrencilerin mantıksal düşünme becerilerini geliştirecek eğitim faaliyetlerine daha fazla yer verilmesi önerilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bilişsel gelişim
• özel yetenekli öğrenci
• mantıksal düşünme
• Longeot

Kaynakça

1. Başerer, D. (2017). Logical thinking as a kind of thinking. The Journal of Academic Social Science, 5(41), 433-442.
2. Battista, M. T. (1990). Spatial visualization and gender differences in high school geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 47-60.
3. Bektasli, B. (2006). The relationships between spatial ability, logical thinking, mathematics performance and kinematics graph ınterpretation skills of 12th grade physics students. Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State Univesity.
4. Bümen, N. T. (2010). Çoklu zeka: Eğitimde yeni yönelimler [Multiple intelligences: New directions in education]. Pegem Akademi.
5. Çıbık-Sert, A., & Emrahoğlu, N. (2008). The effect of project-based learning approach on the development of students' logical thinking skills in science class. Çukurova University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, (1)2, 51-66.
6. Demirel, Ö. (2009). Öğretme sanatı: Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri [The art of teaching: Teaching principles and methods]. Pegem Akademi.
7. Demirtaş, Z. (2011). Relationship between high school students' scientific thinking abilities with gender and achievement. International Journal of Human Sciences, 8 (1), 1460-1471.
8. Geban, Ö., Aşkar, P., & Özkan, İ. (1992). Effects of computer simulated experiments and problem solving approaches on high school students. Journal of Educational Research, 86, 5-10.

9. Hacıömeroğlu, E.S., & Hacıömeroğlu, G. (2018). Examining prospective teachers’ logical reasoning ability: The Longeot’s test of cognitive development. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 9(3), 413-448.
10. Karakuyu, Y., & Tortop, H.S. (2009). Investigating the effects of thought experiments on students’ conceptual understanding and logical thinking ability. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Social Sciences, 19, 42-58.
11. Karasar, N. (2007). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods]. Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
12. Kılıç, D., & Sağlam, N. (2009). Investigating students’ logical thinking abilities in terms of certain variables. Ege Journal of Education, 10(2), 23-38.
13. Kıncal, R. Y., & Yazgan, A. (2010). Investigating the formal operational thinking skills of 7th and 8th grade primary school students according to some variables. Elementary Education Online, 9(2), 723-733.
14. Lazear, D. (2000). The intelligent curriculum. Zephyr Pres.
15. Lis, A., & Magro, T. (1993). Study of Longeot's test of formal operational thinking in a group of Italian adolescents. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76(3), 739-752.
16. Özlem, D. (2012). Mantık [Logic]. Notos Kitap Yayınevi.
17. Plano-Clark, V.L., & Creswell, J. W. (2015). Understanding research: A consumer’s guide. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
18. Rawlinson, J. G. (1995). Yaratıcı düşünme ve beyin fırtınası [Creative thinking and brainstorming]. Rota Yayın.
19. Rohaeti, E. E., Putra, H. D., & Primandhika, R. B. (2019a). Mathematical understanding and reasoning abilities related to cognitive stage of senior high school students. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1318(1), 12-99.
20. Rohaeti, E. E., Hindun, S., & Fitriani, N. (2019b). Correlation of self-efficacy and mathematical critical thinking skills based on student’s cognitive stage. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1315(1), 12-34.
21. Sak, U. (2011). Üstün yetenekliler eğitim programları [Gifted education programs]. Maya Yayınları.
22. Savant, M. (1997). The power of logical thinking. St. Martin’s Press,
23. Senemoğlu, N. (2004). Gelişim, öğrenme ve öğretim [Development, learning and teaching]. Gazi Kitabevi.
24. Simatwa, E. M. W. (2010). Piaget’s theory of intellectual development and its implication for instructional management at pre-secondary school level. Educational Research on Review, 5 (7), 366-371.
25. Staver, J. R., & Gabel, D.L. (1979). The development and construct validation of a group-administered test of fonnal thought Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16, 535-544.
26. Sukarna, N., Sumarmo, U., & Kurniawan, R. (2020). The role of ınquiry approach and cognitive stage on student’s mathematical critical thinking ability and self regulated learning. Journal of Educational Experts, 3 (2), 74-86.
27. Sumarmo, U. (1987). Kemampuan pemahaman dan penalaran matematika siswa sma dikaitkan dengan kemampuan penalaran logik siswa dan beberapa unsur proses belajar-mengajar Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
28. Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2003). Students’ achievement in human circulatory system unit: The effect of reasoning ability and gender. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(1), 59-64.
29. Tuna, A., Biber, A. Ç., & İncikapı, L. (2013). An analysis of mathematics teacher candidates’ logical thinking levels: Case of Turkey. Journal of Educational Instructional Studies in the World, 3(1), 83-91.
30. Turgut, M., Yenilmez, K., & Balbağ, Z., (2017). Prospective teachers’ logical and spatial thinking skills: the effects of department, gender and academic performance. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, (41), 265-283.
31. Ward, C. R., Nurrenbern, S. C., & Herron, J. D. (1981). Evaluation of the longeot test of the cognitive development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18(2), 123-130.
32. Yaman, S., & Karamustafaoğlu, S. (2006). Investigation of logical thinking skills and attitudes scale towards chemistry of prospective teachers. Erzincan Journal of Education Faculty, 8(1), 91-106.
33. Yenilmez, A., Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2005). Investigating students' logical thinking abilities: The effects of gender and grade level. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Faculty, 28, 219-225.
34. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
35. Zarotiadou, E., & Tsaparlis, G. (2000). Teaching lower-secondary chemistry with a Piagetian constructivist and an Ausbelian meaningful-receptive method: A longitudinal comparison. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 1(1), 37-50.