A New Model Program for Academically Gifted Students in Turkey: Overview of the Education Program for the Gifted Students’ Bridge with University (EPGBU)

Abstract

All over the world, studies related to design of appropriate educational programs for gifted students have been continuing. It is also important that these programs should be adapted to both realities of countries and developing educational technologies. In Turkey, the structure of The Education Program for the Gifted Students’ Bridge with University (EPGBU) has basically been determined as mentoring and e-mentoring which are gifted education approaches. EPGBU has been prepared for the education of academically gifted students.

Keywords

• academically gifted students,mentoring,e-mentoring,The Education Program for the Gifted Students’ Bridge with University (EPGBU)

References

1. Akarsu, F. (2004). Üstün yetenekliler. [Gifted Students] Şirin, M., R., Kulaksızoğlu A, ve Bilgili A., E., (Ed) I.Türkiye Üstün Yetenekli Çocuklar Kongresi Makaleler Kitabı içinde, (127-154). Çocuk Vakfı Yayınları, Yayın No:64, İstanbul.
2. Akin, L., & Hilbun, J. (2007). E-mentoring in three voices. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 10(1), 1.
3. Ataman, A. (2004). Üstün zekalı ve üstün yetenekli çocuklar [Gifted and Talented Children] Şirin, M., R., Kulaksızoğlu A, ve Bilgili A., E., (Ed) I.Türkiye Üstün Yetenekli Çocuklar Kongresi Makaleler Kitabı içinde, (155-168). Çocuk Vakfı Yayınları, Yayın No:64, İstanbul.
4. Bennett, D., Tsikalas, K., Hupert, N., Meade, T., & Honey, M. (1998). The benefits of online mentoring for high school girls: Telementoring Young Women in Science, Engineering, and Computing Project, year 3 evaluation. Newyork: Center for Children & Technology.
5. Betts, G. T. (1986). The autonomous learner model: For the gifted and talented. Greeley, CO: ALPS Publishing.
6. Betts, G.T. & Kercher, J.K. (1999).The autonomous learner model: Optimizing ability. Greeley, CO: ALPS Publishing.
7. Bonnett, C. (2002). Mirroring and managing in electronic mentoring: Factors in interactivity between student–scientist pairs. Unpublished master’s paper, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
8. Bonnett, C., Wildermuth, B. M., Sonnenwald, D. H. (2006). Interactivity between protégés and scientists in an electronic mentoring program. Instructional Science. 34, 21-61.

9. Burns, J. C., Okey, J. R., & Wise, K. C. (1985). Development of an integrated process skill test: TIPSII. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22 (2), 169-177.
10. Dille, B., & Mezack, M. (1991). Identifying predictors of high risk among community college telecourse students. The American Journal of Distance Education, 5(1), 24-35.
11. Feldhusen, J. F., & Kolloff, P. B. (1986). The Purdue three-stage enrichment model for gifted education at the elementary level. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
12. Gokdere, M., Kucuk, M, ve Cepni, S., (2003). Gifted science education in Turkey: Gifted teachers' selection, perspectives and needs. Asia Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 4,(2), Article 5.
13. Gray, W.A. (1982). Mentor-Assisted Enrichment Projects for the Gifted and Talented. Educational Leadership, November, 16-21.
14. Hunt, D. E. (Eds.). (1979). Learning style and student needs: An introduction to conceptual level. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
15. Hunt, K., (2005). E-mentoring: solving the issue of mentoring across distances. Development and Learning in Organizations 19(5), 7–10.
16. IGET-Network, (2013). Retrieved from: http://www.iget-network.org/programs/e-mentoring/
17. Kahraman, M. (2010). E-mentoring for professional development of information technologies teachers candidates. Doctoral Thesis. Anadolu University. Eskisehir, Turkey.
18. Kaplan, S.N. (1986). The Grid: A model to construct differentiated curriculum for the gifted. J.S. Renzulli (Ed), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfiled Center, Connecticut, USA: Creative Learning Press, Inc.
19. Kazu, İ.Y. & Senol, C., (2012). Views of teachers about gifted curriculum (Case of BİLSEM). E-International Journal of Educational Research. 3(2), 13-35.
20. Koksal, A.E. (2002). The acquisition of science process skills through guided (teacher-directed) inquiry. PhD Dissertation. Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey
21. Kulik, J.A. (1992): An analysis of the research on ability grouping: Historical and contemporary perspectives. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
22. Kunt, K. & Tortop, H.S. (2013). The metaphoric perceptions of gifted students about Science and Arts Centers in Turkey. Journal of Gifted Education Research. 1(2), 117-127.
23. Kuzu, A., Kahraman, M., ve Odabaşı, F., (2012). Mentörlükte Yeni Bir Yaklaşım: e-Mentörlük. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 12(4), 173-183.
24. Lamb, P & Aldous, D. (2013). The role of E-Mentoring in distinguishing pedagogic experiences of gifted and talented pupils in physical Education. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. 1-20.
25. Levent, F. (2011). Üstün yetenekli çocukların hakları el kitabı, anne baba ve öğretmenler için. [Handbook of gifted children’ rights, for parents and teachers]. Çocuk Vakfı Yayınları:İstanbul.
26. Lewis, C. W. (2002). International Telementoring Program Executive Summary: Evaluation Results from Teacher Survey. Fort Collins: Research and Development Center for the Advancement of Student Learning, Colorado State University.
27. Maker, C.J. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Rockville, MD: Apsen Systems.
28. MentorNet, (2002). 2000-2001 MentorNet Evaluation Report. http://www.mentornet.net/documents/about/results/evaluation.
29. MNE (Ministry of National Education of Turkish Republic, Gifted Students Strategy and Executive Plan 2013-2017, (2013). 2013-2017 Üstün Yetenekli Bireyler Strateji ve Uygulama Planı. http://www.tubitak.gov.tr/sites/default/files/10_ek-1_ustunyetenekliler.pdf .
30. MNE, SACs Directive (BİLSEM Yönergesi), (2007). http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/2593_0.html .
31. MNE, Science High School Directive (Fen Lisesi Yönetmeliği), (2013). http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/50.html .
32. Nash, D. (2001). Enter the mentor. Parenting for High Potential, 12, 18-21.
33. Neber, H. & Schommer-Aikins, M. (2002). Self-regulated science learning with highly gifted students: the role of cognitive, motivational, epistemological, and environmental variables. High Ability Studies, 13(1), 59-74
34. O’Neill, D.K. (1998). Engaging science practice through science practitioners: Design experiments in K-12 telementoring. Doctoral dissertation, North Western University.
35. O'Neill, K., Weiler, M. & Sha, L. (2005). Software support for online mentoring programs: A research-inspired design. Mentoring and Tutoring, 13(1), 109-131.
36. Ozdemir, T.Y. (2012). E-mentoring model for maintaining the provincial education inspectors and assistant inspectors? professional development. Doctoral Thesis. Educational Sciences Institute. Fırat University. Elazig, Turkey.
37. Pintrich P.R., De Groot E.V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1),33-40
38. Reis, S.M. & Rezulli, J.S. (1978). Using curriculum compacting to challenge the above-average. Educational Leadership, 59(2), 51-57.
39. Renzulli, J. S. (1977). The Enrichment Triad Model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
40. Robinson, A., Shore B. M., & Enersen, D. L. (2007). Best practices in gifted education: An evidence-based guide. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
41. Sak, U. (2009). Üstün yetenekliler eğitim programları. Üstün zekalı ve üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin eğitimlerinde model bir program. Maya Akademi Yayıncılık: Ankara.
42. Sak, U. (2010). Üstün zekalılar özellikleri tanılanmaları ve eğitimleri, Maya Akademi, Ankara.
43. Sak, U. (2011). An overview and social validity the education programs for talented students model (EPTS). Education and Science. 36(161), 1-17.
44. Scandura, T. A. (1998). Dysfunctional mentoring relationships and outcomes. Journal of Management,24(3), 449-467.
45. Siegel, D. (2003). Mentors on the net: Extending learning through telementoring. Gifted Child Today, 26(4), 51-54.
46. Siegel, D. (2005). Developing mentorship programs for gifted students. TX: Prufrock Press, Inc.
47. Stake, J.E. & Mares, K, R. (2001). Science enrichment programs for gifted high school girls and boys: predictors of program impact on science confidence and motivation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 38(10), 1065-1088.
48. Tomlinson, C.A., Kaplan, S.N., Renzulli, J.S., Purcell, J., Leppien, J. & Burns, D. (2002). The parallel curriculum: A design to develop high potential and challenge high-ability learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
49. Tortop, H.S. (2012). Radical acceleration in educational process of highly gifted students and the situation Turkey. Higher Education and Science. 2(2), 106-113.
50. Tortop, H.S. (2013a). Overview of a national science fair in Turkey from the focus on administrators’, teachrs’, students’ view and quality of science projects. Journal of Adiyaman University Social Science Institute. 6(11), 255-308.
51. Tortop, H.S. (2013b). Science teachers' views about the science fair at primary education level. Turkish Journal of Qualitative Inquiry. 4(2), 56-64.
52. Tortop, H.S. (2013c). The education program for the gifted students’ bridge with university (EPGBU). International Conference on Talent Development & Excellence. 25-28 September 2013. Antalya, Turkey.
53. Tortop, H.S. (2013d). Development of the self-regulation skills for science learning scale for students. Unpublished research document.
54. Uredi I. (2005). The contributions of perceived parenting styles to 8th class primary school students' self-regulated learning strategies and motivational beliefs. Unpublished Doctoral thesis. Yildiz Technical University, Social Sciences Institute. Istanbul, Turkey.
55. Van Tassel-Baska, J. & Wood, S.M. (2009). The integrated curriculum model. 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. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
56. Van Tassel-Baska, J. (1998). Characteristics and needs of talented learners, In, Vantassel-Baska, J. (Ed), Excellence in educating gifted and talented learners, (3rd ed, 173-191), Love Publishing, Colorado.
57. Yang, Chia-Hsin (2001).The application of Internet teaching in grade 1–9 curriculum. Taiwan Education, 607, 2–9.