DEVELOPING CURRICULUM DIFFERENTIATION BASED PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE AND EXAMINING TEACHERS’ UNDERSTANDING ABOUT ROLE OF TEACHER

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to develop a professional development package based on curriculum differentiation and to examine teachers’ new understandings about the role of teacher who performs the differentiated instruction as a result of the implementation of the package. The sample of the study was 15 private school teachers of different branches. The package was composed of 7 sections. The administration of the package lasted 12 weeks in 6-hour sections. As a source of qualitative data, semi-structured interview and written documents were used. The findings indicated that with the participation of the teachers, traditional understanding of teacher’s role as information transmitter who feels obliged to complete the curriculum showed a change to an understanding of the role of teacher who takes individual differences of the students into consideration and believes in the necessity of planning differentiated instruction. It was seen that the participants of the study developed promising understandings that can help to fulfill the teachers’ roles, which are appropriate for the qualities of differentiated instruction environment.

Keywords

• curriculum differentiation, gifted students, professional development of teachers

PROGRAM FARKLILAŞTIRMA ODAKLI MESLEKİ GELİŞİM PAKETİNİN GELİŞTİRİLMESİ VE ÖĞRETMENLERİN ÖĞRETMEN ROLÜNE İLİŞKİN ANLAYIŞLARININ İNCELENMESİ

Öz

Bu çalışmada, program farklılaştırma odaklı mesleki gelişim paketinin geliştirilmesi ve bu paket ile öğretmenlerin farklılaştırılmış öğretimi uygulayan öğretmen rolüne ilişkin geliştirdikleri anlayışların incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklemini farklı branşlarda öğretmenlik yapan 15 özel okul öğretmeni oluşturmuş olup 7 bölümden oluşan eğitimin uygulanması haftada 6 saatlik oturumlar halinde 12 hafta süreyle yapılmıştır. Nitel veri kaynağı olarak yarı-yapılandırılmış görüşme ve yazılı dokümanlar kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular öğretmenlerin katılımlarıyla birlikte öğretmen rollerine yönelik anlayışlarında geleneksel bilgi aktarıcısı normal müfredatı tamamlama zorunluluğunu hisseden öğretmen rolünden öğrencilerin bireysel farklılıkları göz önünde bulundurularak farklılaştırılmış bir öğretimin planlanması gerektiğine ve bunu yapabileceğine inanan öğretmen rolüne doğru kayma şeklinde bir değişim yaşadıklarını göstermiştir. Çalışmaya katılan öğretmenlerin sınıflarında program farklılaştırmaya hakim farklılaştırılmış öğretim ortamının niteliklerine uygun öğretmen rollerini yerine getirebileceklerine dair umut verici anlayışlar oluşturdukları tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• program farklılaştırma, üstün/özel yetenekli öğrenciler, öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişimi

Kaynakça

1. Anderson, K. M. (2007). Differentiating instruction to include all students. Preventing School Failure, 51(3), 49–54.
2. Blozowich, D. G. (2001). Differentiated instruction in heterogeneously grouped sixth grade classrooms. Doctoral dissertation, Immaculate College.
3. Brighton,C.; Hertberg, H.; Moon, T.; Tomlinson, C.; Callahan, C. (2005). Differentiating Instruction in Response to Student Readiness, Interest and Learning Profile in Academically Diverse classrooms: A review of the literature. Journal of the Education of the Gifted, 27 (2/3), 119-145.
4. Chapman; C., & King, R. (2008). Differentiated instructional mo.nlgement: Work smarter, not harder. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
5. Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Gross, M. U. M. (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students (Volumes I and II). Iowa City, IA: The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
6. DoDEA (2006). Department of defense education. Activity gifted education program guide. [Available http://www.dodea.edu/Curriculum/giftedEduc/upload/ge_programGuide_full.pdf], Retrieved on October, 10, 2012. online at:
7. Dodge J. (2009). 25 Quick formative assessment for a differentiated classroom, Scholastic Teaching Resources.
8. EADSNE (2009). European agency for development in special needs education. Gifted learners a http://www.tehetsegpont.hu/dokumentumok/gifted.pdf], Retrieved on October, 10, 2013. policy and provision [Available online at:

9. Ellis, E., Gable, R. A., Gregg, M., & Rock, M. L. (2008). REACH: A framework for differentiating classroom instruction. Preventing School Failure, 52(2), 31–47.
10. Gavin, M. K., Casa, T. M., Adelson, J. L., Carroll, S. R., Sheffield, L. J., & Spinelli, A. M. (2007). Project M3: Mentoring mathematical minds: Challenging curriculum for talented elementary students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18 , 566–585.
11. Gentry, M. L., & Owen, S. V. (1999). An investigation of the effects of total school flexible cluster grouping on identification, achievement, and classroom practices. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43 , 224–243.
12. Gould, B., Kaplan, S., and Siegel, V. (1995). The flip book: A quick and easy method for developing differentiated learning experiences. Calabasas, CA: Educator to Educator.
13. Gubbins, E. J., Housand, B., Oliver, M., Schader, R., & De Wet, C. (2007). Unclogging the mathematics pipeline through access to algebraic understanding. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
14. Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2004). Improving adolescent literacy: Strategies at work. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
15. Fisher, D. and N. Frey N. (2007). Implementing a Schoolwide Literacy Framework: Improving Achievement in an Urban Elementary School,” The Reading Teacher, 61, pp. 32-45.
16. Freeman, J. (2002). Out of School Educational Provision for the Gifted and Talented around the world. A report for the Department of Education and Skills. [Available online at: http://joanfreeman.com/pdf/Text_part_one.pdf], Retrieved on October, 08, 2013.
17. Heacox, D. (2002). Differentiating Instruction in the Regular Classroom: How to Reach and Teach all Learners, Grades 3-12. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing.
18. Knowles, J. G. & Holt-Reynolds, D. (1991). Shaping pedagogies through personal histories in preservice teacher education. Teachers College Record, 93(1), 87-111.
19. Erdoğan M. N. (2011). Açık-Düşündürücü Öğretim Dizini ile Bilimin Doğası Odaklı Fen İçeriği Öğretiminin Lise Öğrencilerinin Bilimin Doğası Anlayışlarına Etkisi (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi), Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.
20. Erdoğan, M. N. (2015). Eğitim programında ve uygulamada farklılaştırma. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
21. Koseoğlu F., Tümay H. (2013). Bilim eğitiminde yapılandırıcı paradigma. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
22. Kulik, J. A. (1992). An analysis of the research on ability grouping: Historical and contemporary perspectives. Storrs: University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
23. Kulik J.A. & Kulik C-L.C. (1997) Ability Grouping. In N. Colangelo and G.A. Davis Handbook of gifted education (2Ed). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. nd
24. Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Baverly Hills, CA: Sage.
25. Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works (1st ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
26. McLaughlin, M., & Vogt, M. (2000). Creativity and innovation in content area teaching: A resource for intermediate, middle, and high school teachers. Norwood, MA: Chirstopher- Gordon.
27. McAdamis, S. (2001). Teachers tailor their instruction to meet a variety of student needs. Journal of Staff Development, 22(2), 1-5.
28. McBride, B. (2004). Data-driven instructional methods: "One-strategy-fits-all" doesn't work in real classrooms. T.H.E Journal, 31(11), 38-40.
29. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB, 2012). Üstün yeteneklilerin eğitimi alanında uluslararası politika ve https://orgm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2013_02/ 12114109_stnyeteneklerineitimi.pdf]. Erişim Tarihi: 24.05.213. ve
30. değerlendirilmesi raporu. [Çevrim-içi:
31. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB, 2013). Özel Yetenekli Bireyler Strateji ve Uygulama Planı (2013-2017). http://orgm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2013_10/25043741_ozelyeteneklibireylerstratejiv euygulamaplan2013 2017 .pdf]. Erişim Tarihi: 09.04.2014. [Çevrim-içi:
32. Mulroy, H., and Eddinger, K. (2003). Differentiation and literacy. Paper presented at the Institute on Inclusive. Education, Rochester.
33. Munro, J. (2012). The expert knower model as a conceptual tool for understanding gifted and talented knowledge. Occasional Paper (in press). East Melbourne: Centre for Strategic Education.
34. NAGC (2010). National Association for Gifted Children. NAGC Pre-K- Grade 12 Gifted Programing Standards. A Blueprint for Quality Gifted Education Programs. [Available online /Information_and_Resources/Gifted_Program_Standards/K- at:
35. http://www.nagc.org/uploadedFiles 12%20booklet%20for%20convention%20%28final %29.pdf.], Retrieved on 10. October, 2013.
36. Reis, S. M., Westberg, K. L., Kulikowich, J. M., & Purcell, J. H. (1998). Curriculum compacting and achievement test scores: What does the research say? Gifted Child Quarterly, 42 ,123–129.
37. Smith, M.M.C. (2006). Principles of inclusion. Implications for able learners. In M.M.C. Smith(ed.), Including the Gifted and Talented. Making inclusion work for more gifted and able learners. New York, Oxon:Routledge.
38. Tomlinson, C. A. & Jarvis, J.M. (2009). Differentiation: Making Curriculum work for all students through responsive planning and Instruction. In J.S. Renzulli, E.J. Gubbins, K.S. McMillen, R.D. Eckert & C.A. Little (Eds.), Systems and Models for Developing Programs for the Gifted and Talented. (2nd Ed: 599-628). Mansfield Center CT: Creative Learning Press.
39. Tomlinson, C. A. (2005). Grading and differentiation: Paradox or good practice? Theory into Practice, 44(3), 262-269.
40. Tomlinson, C. A. (2004b). Research evidence for differentiation. School Administrator, 61(7), 30 Tomlinson, C. A. (2004c). Sharing responsibility for differentiating instruction. Roeper Review, 26(4), 188-200.
41. Tomlinson, C. A. (2001a). Differentiated instruction in the regular classroom. Understanding Our Gifted, 14(1), 3-6.
42. Tomlinson, C. A. (2000). The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of all Learners. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
43. Tomlinson, C. A., and Kalbfleisch, M. L. (1998). Teach me, teach my brain: A call for differentiated classrooms. Educational Leadership, 56(3), 52-55.
44. Tomlinson, C. A., Moon, T. R., and Callahan, C. M. (1998). How well are we addressing academic diversity in the middle school? Middle School Journal, 29(3), 3-11.
45. Tomlinson, C. A. (1995). Deciding to differentiate instruction in the middle school: One school's journey. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39(2), 77-114.
46. Tuttle, J. (2000). Differentiated Classrooms (Report). Woodbury: Cedar Mountain Academy. [Available at:.http://aim.Cast.Org/learn/historyarchive/backgroundpppers/differentiated-instruction.], Retrieved on November 25, 2010. online
47. Wormeli, R. (2005). Busting myths about differentiated instruction. Principal Leadership, 5 (7), 28-33.
48. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
49. Yıldırım, A. ve Simsek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel arastırma yöntemleri (6. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi.