Investigation of Gifted Students' Problem-Solving Skills

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the level gifted students’ problem-solving skills in terms of their gender and grade level. A total of 68 fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh grade gifted students enrolled in a Science and Art Center participated to the study. In this quantitative survey study, Problem-solving Inventory for Children developed by Serin, Bulut Serin, and Saygılı (2010) was used to collect data from the participants. This instrument consists of three dimensions, which are namely confidence to problem-solving skills, self-control, and avoidance. In order to determine the level of problem-solving skills, an independent-sample t-test and one-way ANOVA were utilized. The results indicated that the level of gifted students’ problem-solving skills was not high. Moreover, while gender did not play role in their problem-solving skills, some grade levels of the participants were significantly superior to other levels regarding to problem-solving skills. In general, it was seen that problem-solving skills of gifted students gets lower as their grade level increases. Based on the findings, some implications were recommended.

Keywords

• gifted students,problem-solving skills

References

1. Akarsu, F. (2004). Gifted and talented. In R. Şirin, A. Kulaksızoğlu, & A. E. Bilgili (Eds.), A book of selected articles about gifted children (pp. 97-103). Istanbul, Turkey: Children’s Foundation.
2. Ataman, A. (1998). Üstün Zekâlılar ve Üstün Yetenekliler, Anadolu Üniversitesi Açıköğretim Fakültesi Yayınları, 183-185.
3. Basmacı, S. K. (1998). Investigation of perceptions of the university students’ problem- solving skills based on different variables. [in Turkish üniversite öğrencilerinin problem çözme becerilerini algılamalarının bazı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi]. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of Inönü, Malatya.
4. Bingham, A. (1958). Improving children's facility in problem-solving (No. 16). Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.
5. Cutts N. E., & Moseley, N. (2001). Education of gifted and talented children. Ankara: Özgür Publications
6. Çakıroğlu, Ü., Sarı, E., & Akkan, Y. (2011). The view of the teachers about the contribution of teaching programming to the gifted students in the problem-solving. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the 5th International Computer & Instructional Technologies Symposium, (22- 24 September), Elazığ: Fırat University.
7. Çam, S. (1997). The effect of communication skills training programme with teacher candidates on ego states and perception of problem solving skill [in Turkish iletişim becerileri eğitimi programının öretmen adaylarının ego durumlarına ve problem çözme becerisi algılarına etkisi]. Unpublished master’s thesis. Ankara University; Ankara
8. Çapan, E. B. (2010) Metaphoric sensations of teacher candidates about gifted students. International Social Researches Journal, 3(12), 140-154.

9. Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (1998). Education of the gifted and talented (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
10. Enç, M. (2005). Outstanding brain power. Ankara: Gündüz Education and Publications
11. Fraenkel, J.R. & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw-Hill.
12. Freeman, J. (1999). Teaching gifted pupils. Journal of Biological Education, 33, 185-190.
13. Genç, H., & Küçük, M. (2003). A case study on the application of the student centered science education program. [in Turkish Öğrenci Merkezli Fen Bilgisi Öğretim Programının Uygulanması Üzerine Bir Durum Tespit Çalışması]. In Proceedings of XII. Educational Sciences Congress, Antalya (pp. 1555-1572).
14. Gökçe, İ. (2006). Evaluation of the inner valume of the science and technology curriculum and teacher’s guide and the problems faced in the practice (Balıkesir Example). [in Turkish fen ve teknoloji dersi programı ile öğretmen kılavuzunun içsel olarak değerlendirilmesi ve uygulamada karşılaşılan sorunlar (Balıkesir örneği)]. Unpublished master’s thesis. Balıkesir University, Balıkesir.
15. Hedricks, K. B. (2009). The impact of ability grouping on achievement, self-efficacy and classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Walden Univerity, Walden.
16. Heppner, P. P., & Baker, C. E. (1997). Applications of the Problem-solving Inventory. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 29, 229-241.
17. Heppner, P. P., & Krauskopf, C. J. (1987). An information-processing approach to personal problem-solving. The Counseling Psychologist, 15, 371-447.
18. Johnsen, S. K., & Ryser, G. R. (1996). An overview of effective practices with gifted students in general-education settings. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 379-404.
19. Johnson, D. T., Boyce, L. N., & VanTassel-Baska, J. (1995). Science curriculum review: Evaluating materials for high-ability learners. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39(1), 36-43.
20. Kanli E., & Emir S. (2009). The effect of problem based learning in science and technology to the motivation levels of gifted and normal students. [in Turkish Fen ve teknoloji öğretiminde probleme dayalı öğrenmenin üstün zekalı ve normal öğrencilerin motivasyon düzeylerine etkisi]. Sakarya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18, 42-60.
21. Katkat, D. (2001). The comparing with the skills of problem solving from the perspective of different variables for the teacher candidates. [in Turkish öğretmen adaylarının problem çözme becerilerinin çesitli değiskenler bakımından karsılastırılması.] Unpublished master’s thesis, Erzurum University, Erzurum.
22. Kozandağı, İ. (2001). The Problems faced in the curriculum of science lesson in the fourth and fifth classes of the elementary schools and the solution suggestions according to the opinions of the teachers. [in Turkish Öğretmen görüşlerine göre ilköğretim okulları 4. ve 5. sınıf fen bilgisi öğretim programlarında karşılaşılan sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri]. Unpublished master’s thesis. Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir.
23. Lefcourt, H. J., & Loughlin, H. M. (1966). Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 65, 206-220
24. Özmen, Ş. G. (2003). Surveying of science teachers opinions on constructivist learning approach [in Turkish fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin yapılandırmacı öğrenme yaklaşımına ilişkin görüşlerinin incelenmesi].Unpublished master’s thesis. Hacettepe University, Ankara.
25. Renzulli, J. S. (1998). A rising tide lifts all ships. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 104.
26. Rotigel, J., & Fello, S. (2004). Mathematically gifted students: How can we meet their needs? Gifted Child Today, 27(4), 46–51.
27. Rotter, J. B. (1978). Generalized expectancies for problem-solving and psychotherapy. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 2(1), 1-10.
28. Saygılı, H. (2000). The examination of relationship between the skill of problem solving and social and individual adjustment. [in Turkish Problem çözme becerisi ile sosyal ve kişisel uyum arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi]. Unpublished master’s thesis. Atatürk University, Erzurum.
29. Saygılı, G. (2014). Problem-solving skills employed by gifted children and their peers in public primary schools in Turkey. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 42(1), 53-63.
30. Schiever, S. W., & Maker, C. J. (2003). New directions in enrichment and acceleration. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 163-173). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
31. Serin, O., Bulut Serin, N., & Saygılı, G. (2010). Developing Problem Solving Inventory for Children at the Level of Primary Education (PSIC). [in Turkish İlköğretim düzeyindeki Çocuklar için Problem Çözme Envanteri'nin (ÇPÇE) geliştirilmesi]. İlköğretim Online, 9(2). 446-458.
32. Stankov, L., & Roberts, R. D. (1997). Mental speed is not the ‘basic’ process of intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(1), 69-84.
33. Şahin, Z. (2000). A comparative study on children’ psychosocial based problem solving skills in terms of various variables. [in Turkish çocukların psiko-sosyal temelli problem çözme becerilerinin çeşitli değişkenler açısından karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmesi]. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 6, 451-471.
34. Taylan, S. (1990). Adaptation, credibility and validity studies of Heppner’s problem-solving inventory. Unpublished master’s thesis, Ankara Universit, Ankara.
35. Terzi Işık, Ş. (2000). Investigation of sixth grade students’ perceptions of interpersonal problem solving skills in terms of some variables. [in Turkish İlköğretim Okulu Altıncı Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Kişilerarası Problem Çözme Beceri Algılarının Bazı Değişkenler Açısından İncelenmesi]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Gazi University, Ankara.
36. Toluk, Z., Olkun, S. (2001). An Examination of Elementary School Textbooks in terms of Developing Problem Solving Skills. [in Turkish ilköğretim ders kitaplarının problem çözme becerilerinin geliştirilmesi açısından incelenmesi.] X. Educatinoal Science Congress, Abant İzzet Baysal University, Bolu.
37. Ülger, Ö. E. (2003). The Relationship Between Leadership Behaviours and Problem solving Abilities of School Managers. [in Turkish okul yöneticilerinin problem çözme becerilerinin liderlik davranışlarıyla ilişkisi.] Unpublished master’s thesis, Istanbul University, Istanbul.
38. VanTassel-Baska, J. (1994). Comprehensive curriculum for gifted learners (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
39. Wilson, S. (2000). Construct validity and reliability of a performance assessment rubric to measure student understanding and problem-solving in college physics: Implications for public accountability in higher education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
40. Winebrenner, S. (2000). Gifted students need an education, too. Educational Leadership, 52-56. Yangın, S., & Dindar, H. (2007). The perceptions of teachers about the change on elementary school science and technology curriculum. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 33, 240-255.
41. Yoon, C. H. (2009). Self-regulated learning and instructional factors in the scientific inquiry of scientifically gifted Korean middle school students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55, 203-216.