Teaching practices and evaluation with distance education of gifted students

Abstract

It is known that gifted individuals who receive education in Science and Art Centers (SACs) in Turkiye have problems in reaching different educations in accordance with their individual competencies . This study aimed to determine the expectations of gifted students towards distance education, to show that this training can be given with the distance education method after the courses offered through distance education, and to develop an alternative way for the future. Explanatory sequential design, one of the mixed research types in which quantitative and qualitative research designs are used together, was employed in the research. The study group of the research consisted of 40 gifted students and 40 parents of these students in three SACs in Turkiye. The quantitative data of the study were analyzed by using the SPSS program. Quantitative data of the study were obtained with a "10-items student online learning expectations form and 5-items parent evaluation form". Qualitative data of the study were obtained with an 8-items student self-evaluation form. In the research, 4 weeks of distance education were given to the students; "Astronomy, Thinking Skills, Teaching Mathematics with Origami, Robotic Coding, Intelligence Games and Values Education" lessons were explained, and the data obtained at the end of the application were analyzed and interpreted with the MAXQDA program. As a result, it is revealed that gifted students in SACs are quite satisfied with the distance education training within this study's scope. In addition, the present study showed that education programs can be rearranged and made suitable for distance education for the emergent transitions to distance education that emerged with the Covid-19 pandemic.

Keywords

• Distance learning
• Gifted children
• Online education
• Science and Art Center

Supporting Institution

This study was supported by Ondokuz Mayis University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit.

Project Number

Project No: PYO.EGF.1904.19.008

References

1. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş. and Demirel, F. (2008). Scientific research methods (14th Edition). Ankara: Pegem Publications
2. Creswell, J. W., and Plano Clark, V. L. (2014). Mixed methods research design and conduct. Yüksel Dede and Selçuk Beşir Demir (translator.), Ankara: Anı Publishing
3. Delcker, J. and Ifenthaler, D. (2020). Teachers’ perspective on school development at German vocational schools during the Covid-19 pandemic, Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 30(1), 125-139.
4. Delibay, S. (2017). Science and Art Center Exam – SAC, https://suleymandelibay.blogspot.com.tr/2017/11/bilim-sanat-merkezi-sinavi-SAC.html, Date of access: 12.02.2022.
5. Ewing, L.A. and Cooper, H.B. (2021). Technology-enabled remote learning during COVID-19: perspectives of Australian teachers, students and parents, Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 30 (1). 41-57.
6. George, D., and Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, Boston: Pearson.
7. Händel, M., Stephan, M., Zikuda, M.G., Kopp, B., Bedenlier, S. and Ziegler, A.(2020). Digital readiness and its effects on higher education students’ socio-emotional perceptions in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Research on Technology in Education.1-13.
8. Kabapınar, F. (2003). Differences of a scale that can be used to measure misconceptions from a scale that aims to measure knowledge-comprehension level. Educational Management in Theory and Practice, 35, 398-417.

9. Kaçan, A. and Gelen, İ. (2020). An overview of distance education programs in Turkey. International Journal of Education Science and Technology, 6(1). 1-21.
10. Karasar, N. (2002). Scientific research method. Ankara: Nobel Publishing.
11. Lee, K., Fanguy, M., Lu, X. S. and Bligh, B. (2021). Student learning during covid-19: ıt was not as bad as we feared, Distance Education, 42(1), 164-172.
12. Leontyeva, I. A. (2018). Modern Distance Learning Technologies in Higher Education: Introduction Problems. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(10) 1-8
13. Merriam, S. B. (2013). A guide to qualitative research design and practice. Selahattin Turan (Trans. Edt.). Ankara: Nobel Academic Publishing.
14. Miles, M. B., and Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. 2.Edition.
15. Nguyen, T. (2015). The effectiveness of online learning: beyond no significant difference and future horizons. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching,11(2).
16. Özdamar, K. (1999). Statistical data analysis with package programs-I, Eskişehir.Kaan Bookstore
17. Salman, S. A., Alkathiri, M. and Bawaneh, A. (2021). Schooloff, learning on: identification of preference and challenges among school students towards distance learning during COVID19 outbreak, International Journal of Lifelong Education, 40(1), 53-71.
18. Satıcı, A. F. , Elibol, M., & Kotan, S. (2020). “Students' Opinions about Programming Courses Given by Distance Education”. The 3nd International Conference on Distance Learning and Innovative Educational Technologies, Abstracts , Ankara, Turkey, 10 December 2020.
19. Şeker, H. ve Gençdoğan, B. (2014). Psikolojide ve eğitimde ölçme aracı geliştirme. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
20. Şenol, C. (2011). Teachers' views on gifted education programs. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Fırat University Institute of Educational Sciences, Elazig.
21. Turkish Ministry of National Education (TMNE) (2015). Science and art centers directive. Date of access: 12 February 2022, https://orgm.TMNE.gov.tr/TMNE_iys_dosyalar/2015_09/18101802_bilimvesanatmerkezleriynergesi.pdf.
22. Turkish Ministry of National Education (TMNE) (2016). 2016-2017 Science and art centers student diagnostic guide. Date of access: 12. Şubat 2022, https://orgm.TMNE.gov.tr/TMNE_iys_dosyalar/2016_10/11093901_bilim_ve_sanat_merkezleri__20162017_kilavuzu.pdf
23. Turkish Ministry of National Education (TMNE) (2016). Science and art centers directive. Date of access: 10 October 2021, https://orgm.TMNE.gov.tr/TMNE_iys_dosyalar/2016_10/07031350_SAC_yonergesi.pdf.
24. Tortop, H. S. (2013). A new model program for academically gifted students in turkey: overview of the education program for the gifted students’ bridge with university (EPGBU). Journal for the Education Gifted Young Scientists, 2(1), 21-31.
25. Tortop, H.S. (2014). Gifted students views about first stage of Education Program for Gifted Students’ Bridge with University (EPGBU). Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 5.
26. Türnüklü, A. (2000). A qualitative research technique that can be used effectively in educational science research: Interview. Educational Management in Theory and Practice, 6(4): 543-559.
27. Veletsianos, G., Kimmons, R., Larsen, R. and Rogers, J. (2021). Temporal flexibility, gender, and online learning completion. Distance Education. 42(1). 22-36.
28. Yıldırım, A. and Şimşek, H. (2008). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.