Investigation of attitudes and self-efficacy of mathematics teachers towards gifted education

Abstract

Some of the problems in the education of gifted students are based on the qualifications of the teachers. Teachers' attitudes and perceptions towards gifted students have a significant impact on the education to be provided to gifted students. It is thought that it is important to determine the general attitudes and perceptions of teachers and to provide required information to teachers in order to achieve the purpose of gifted education. In this study, it is aimed to determine the attitudes and self-efficacy of mathematics teachers towards gifted education within the scope of basic education and/or gifted education. In the study, the survey method was used to determine the relationships between two or more variables. The sample of the study consists of mathematics teachers working in Niğde province. In this study, the attitudes and self-efficacy of elementary and high school mathematics teachers towards giftedness and gifted education were tried to be relationally revealed. The data collection tools of the study were ASGE-the attitude scale for gifted education- (Tortop, 2014a) and GESST- the gifted education self-efficacy scale for teachers (Tortop, 2014b). The data were analyzed using the SPSS-24 program. As a result of the research, it was revealed that there was no expected relationship between attitude and self-efficacy, but the expected relationship was seen in the sub-dimensions of both scales. It was concluded that teachers with high attitudes towards gifted education showed a high tendency to create gifted classes. It was concluded that teachers with high academic qualification had similar levels of mentoring qualification, personal traits and instructional planning qualification. It was concluded that teachers' attitudes and self-efficacy towards creating special ability classes according to the needs of gifted students had a moderate relationship. It was concluded that teachers mostly agree on supporting the needs of gifted students with special services where as they generally do not support the idea of creating special ability classes according to the needs of gifted students. Moreover, teachers’ attitudes do not change according to their personal traits and their attitudes towards the needs and support of gifted students are less related to their creativity. ANOVA analysis reveals that there is no significant difference was found according to age of the participants; however, regression analysis revealed that the 46-50 age group was a predictor of creating gifted classrooms.

Keywords

• Gifted students
• mathematics education
• self efficacy
• attitude
• mathematics teachers

References

1. Akgül, G. (2021). Teachers’ metaphors and views about gifted students and their education. Gifted Education International, 37(3), 273-289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429421988927
2. Albayrak, H. B., Tarım, K., & Baypınar, K. (2023). Özel yetenekli öğrencilerin matematik okuryazarlığı öz-yeterlik algıları ile matematik okuryazarlığı başarılarının incelenmesi [Examining mathematical literacy self-efficacy perceptions and mathematical literacy achievements of specially talented students]. Trakya Eğitim Dergisi, 13(1), 115-127.
3. Arkonaç, S. A. (2016). İnsan insan içinde [Human within human]. İstanbul: Hiperlink Yayınları.
4. Ataman, A. (2003). Üstün zekâlı ve üstün yetenekli çocuklar [Gifted and gifted children]. In A. Ataman (Eds), Özel gereksinimli çocuklar ve özel eğitime giriş [Children with special needs and access to special education] (pp. 173-195). Ankara: Gündüz Eğitim ve Yayıncılık.
5. Allotey, G. A., Watters, J. J., & King, D. (2020). Ghanaian science and mathematics teachers’ beliefs about gifted education strategies. Gifted Education International, 36(3), 250–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429420946732
6. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
7. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive. Englewood Cliffs.
8. Bedur, S., Bilgiç, N., & Taşlıdere, E. (2015). Özel (üstün) yetenekli öğrencilere sunulan destek eğitim hizmetlerinin değerlendirilmesi. HAYEF Journal of Education, 12(1), 159-175.

9. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Akgün, Ö.E., Demirel, F., & Çakmak, K.E. (2016). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri [Scientific Research Methods]. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
10. Caldwell, D. W. (2012). Educating Gifted Students in the Regular Classroom: Efficacy, Attitudes, and Differentiation of Instruction (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis). Georgia Southern University.
11. Cengizhan, S. (2019). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin özel yetenekli öğrenciler için etkinlik tasarlamada-uygulamada karşılaştıkları güçlükler ve eğitime ilişkin görüşleri [The difficulties encountered by classroom teachers in designing and implementing activities for specially talented students and their views on education]. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 7(5), 27-36.
12. Chan, S., & Yuen, M. (2015). Teachers’ beliefs and practices for nurturing creativity in students: Perspectives from teachers of gifted students in Hong Kong. Gifted Education International, 31(3), 200-213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429413511884
13. Clark, B. (2013). Growing up gifted: Developing the potential of children at home and at school. (8th ed). Upper Saddle River, Pearson Education.
14. Croft, L. J. (2003). Teachers of the gifted: Gifted teachers. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3th ed., pp. 558–571), Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
15. Çapri, B., & Kan, A. (2007). Öğretmenlerin kişilerarası öz-yeterlik inançlarının hizmet süresi, okul türü, öğretim kademesi ve unvan değişkenleri açısından incelenmesi [Examining teachers' interpersonal self-efficacy beliefs in terms of length of service, school type, teaching level and title variables]. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(1), 63-83.
16. Dağlıoğlu, H.E., & Suveren, S. (2013). Okul öncesi dönem üstün yetenekli çocukları belirlenmesinde öğretmen ve aile görüşleri ile çocukların performanslarının tutarlılığının incelenmesi [Examining the consistency of teachers' and families' views and children's performance in identifying gifted preschool children]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 13(1), 431-453.
17. Davaslıgil, Ü. (2004a). Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Özel Eğitim ve Rehberlik Dairesi Başkanlığı [Ministry of National Education Department of Special Education and Guidance]. Üstün Yetenekli Çocuklar ve Eğitimleri. Ön Rapor. Ankara.
18. Demirci, N., & Tertemiz, N. I. (2022). Üstün zekâlılar eğitimi dergilerinde yayınlanan matematik eğitimi çalışmalarına yönelik bir tematik derleme çalışması [A thematic compilation study on mathematics education studies published in gifted education journals]. Uluslararası Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 2022(19), 381-410.
19. Dinçer, S. (2019). Investigation of the gifted education self-efficacy of teachers work with gifted students. Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity, 6(3), 167–174.
20. Donerlson, E. (2008). Elementary school teachers' attitudes and beliefs toward teaching gifted students in heterogeneous classrooms (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation), WaldenUniversity.
21. Drain, J. (2008). Teachers' attitudes and practices toward differentiating for gifted learners in K-5 general education classrooms (Publication No: 3308106) [Doctoral dissertation] ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database.
22. Duda, B. J., Ogolnoksztalcacych, Z. S., & Poland, Z. (2010). Mathematical creative activity and graphic calculator. International Journal of Technology in Mathematics Education, 18(1), 3-14.
23. Enç, M. (2005). Üstün beyin gücü [Superior brain power]. İkinci Baskı. Ankara: Gündüz Eğitim ve Yayıncılık.
24. Erdogan, S. C. (2017). Science teaching attitudes and scientific attitudes of pre-service teachers of gifted students. Journal of Education and Practice, 8(6), 164–170.
25. Erişen, Y., Birben, F. Y., Yalın, H. S., & Ocak, P. (2015). Üstün yetenekli çocukları fark edebilme ve destekleme eğitiminin öğretmenler üzerindeki etkisi. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 4(2), 586-602.
26. Ford, D. Y., & Trotman M. F. (2001). Teachers of gifted students: Suggested multicultural characteristics and competencies. Roeper Review, 23(4), 235-239. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190109554111
27. George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0update (10a ed.), Pearson.
28. Girgin, D. (2020). Özel yetenekli öğrencilerin desteklenmesi için gereken yeterlilikler: Sınıf öğretmenlerinin görüşleri [Competencies required to support gifted students: opinions of classroom teachers]. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 19(74), 895–915.
29. Hong, E.,Greene, M., & Hartzell, S. (2011). Cognitive and motivational characteristics of elementary teachers in general education classrooms and in gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(4), 250-264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986211418107 İnceoğlu, M. (2011). Tutum, Tutum, iletişim. Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
30. Jurisevi, M., & Zerak, U. (2019). Attitudes towards gifed students and teir education in the ˇ slovenian context. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 12(4), 101–117. https://doi.org/10. 11621/pir.2019.0406
31. Kazu, İ. Y., & Şenol, C. (2012). Üstün yetenekliler eğitim programına ilişkin öğretmen görüşleri (BİLSEM örneği)[ Teacher opinions about the gifted education program]. Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(2), 13-35.
32. Khalil, M., & Accariya, Z. (2016). Identifying “good” teachers for gifted students. Creative Education, 7(3), 407-418. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2016.73040
33. Katerina, K., Maria K., Polina, I., Maria, E., Constantinos, C., & Marios, P. (2010). Perceptions on teaching the mathematically gifted. In V. Durand-Guerrier, S. Soury- Lavergne & F. Arzarello (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp.1781-1790). Lyon: Institute National de Recherche Pédagogique Krutetski.
34. Kayış, A. (2009). Güvenilirlik Analizi [Reliability Analysis]. In S. Kalaycı (Ed.), SPSS Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri [SPSS Applied Multivariate Statistics Techniques] (pp. 405). Asil Yayınları.
35. Kılıç, S. (2016). Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient. Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, 6(1), 47. https://doi.org/10.5455/jmood.20160307122823
36. Kılıç, S. (2013). Örnekleme yöntemleri [Sampling methods]. Journal of Mood Disorders, 3(1), 44-6. doi: https://doi.org/10.5455/jmood.20130325011730
37. Kirişçi, N. Türkiye'de özel yetenekli öğrencilerin matematik eğitimi alanında yapılan tezlerdeki eğilimler: 1990-2021. Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 14(1), 149-175.
38. Kirschenbaum, R. J. (1989). Understanding the creative activity of students. Creative Learning Press.
39. Krijan, I. P., & Boric, E. (2015). Teachers’ attitudes towards gifted students and differences in attitudes regarding the years of teaching. Croatian Journal of Education: Hrvatski Casopis ˇ Za Odgoj I Obrazovanje, 17(1), 165–178.
40. Kunt, K., & Tortop, H. S. (2017). Examination of science and technology teachers’ attitude and opinions related giftedness and gifted education in Turkey. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 5(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.17478/JEGYS.2017.53
41. Lassig, Carly J. (2009) Teachers' attitudes towards the gifted: The importance of Professional development and school culture. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 18(2). pp. 32-42.
42. Lewis, J. F. (1982). Bulldozers or chairs? Gifted students describe their ideal teachers. Gifted Child Today, 23, 16-19. https://doi.org/10.1177/107621758200500307
43. Matheis, S., Kronborg, L., Schmitt, M., & Preckel, F. (2017). Threat or challenge? Teacher beliefs about gifted students and their relationship to teacher motivation. Gifted and Talented International, 32(2), 134-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2018.1537685
44. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (1991). Üstün Yetenekli Çocuklar ve Eğitimleri Raporu [Gifted Children and Their Education Report]. Ankara.
45. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2012). Bilim Sanat Merkezi Yönergesi [Science and Art Center Directive]. http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/2593_0.html
46. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2013). T.C. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Özel Eğitim ve Rehberlik Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü [Ministry of National Education General Directorate of Special Education and Guidance Services], Üstün Yetenekli Bireyler Strateji ve Uygulama Planı 2013-2017 [Gifted Individuals Strategy and Implementation Plan 2013-2017], Ankara.
47. Molapo, T. P., & Salyers, M. (2014). Parent-teacher Shared Commitment as a Predictor for Teachers’ Attitudes toward Gifted Students and Gifted Education. Journal of Studies in Education, 4(1), 190. https://doi.org/10.5296/JSE.V4I1.4819
48. Mottus R., Allik J., Konstabel K., et al. (2008) Beliefs about the relationship between personality andintelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 457–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.05.029
49. Neihart M., & Yeo S.I. (2018). Psychological issues unique to the gifted student. In Pfeiffer S.I., Shaunessy-Dedrick E. and Foley-Nicpon M.(eds) APA Handbooks in Psychology: APA Handbook of Giftedness and Talent. Washington, (pp. 497–510). DC: American Psychological Association.
50. Nyarko, K., Kugbey, N., Amissah, C. M., Ansah-Nyarko, M., & Boateng, F. (2017). Teacher identified giftedness qualities in a Ghanaian school setting: A brief report. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 27(6), 545–548. https://doi.org/10.1080/14330237.2017.1375224
51. Periathiruvadi, S. & Rinn, A. N. (2012). Technology in gifted education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(2), 153-169.
52. Persson, R. S. (1998). Paragons of virtue: Teachers’ conceptual understanding of high ability in anegalitarian school system. High Ability Studies, 9, 181–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359813980090204
53. Oral, E. (2017). Examination of pre-school teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs and self-efficacy regarding gifted education. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 5(4), 49-58.
54. Saltık Ayhanöz, G. (2022). Current Research in Education. In Zahal O. (Eds) The place of intelligence games in mathematics education for gifted students (pp.151-170). Gece Kitaplığı Publisher.
55. Sak, U., Ayas, M. B., Sezerel, B. B., Öpengin, E., Özdemir, N. N., & Gürbüz, Ş. D. (2015). Türkiye’de üstün yeteneklilerin eğitiminin eleştirel bir değerlendirilmesi [A critical evaluation of gifted education in Turkey]. Türk Üstün Zeka ve Eğitim Dergisi, 5(2), 110-132.
56. Sak, U. (2011a). Üstün Zekâlılar: Özellikleri, Tanılanmaları, Eğitimleri [Gifted: Characteristics, Diagnosis, Education]. Maya Akademi.
57. Sak, U. (2011b). Üstün yetenekliler eğitim programlari modeli (ÜYEP) ve sosyal geçerliliği [Gifted Education Program Model (UYEP) and its social validity]. Eğitim ve Bilim, 36(161), 1-17.
58. Sevim, H. İ., & Ahmet, K. (2023). Okullarda denetim sürecine ilişkin öğretmen tutumlari [Teacher attitudes towards the supervision process in schools]. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 52(238), 1285-1304.
59. Serin, M. K., & Korkmaz, İ. (2014). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin hizmet içi eğitim ihtiyaçlarının analizi [Analysis of in-service training needs of classroom teachers]. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(1), 155-169.
60. Siegle, D. (2001). Overcoming bias in gifted and talented referrals. Gifted and Talented Communicator, 32(3), 22-25.
61. Şahin, F. (2015). Üstün Zekâlı Öğrencilerin Öğretmenlerinin Eğitimi [Education of Teachers of Gifted Students]. In F. Şahin (Eds), Üstün Zekâlı ve Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Eğitimi [Education of Gifted and Talented Students], (pp.231 -245). Pegem Akademi.
62. Taber, K. S. (2017). Neden Üstün Yetenekliler İçin Fen Eğitimi [Why Science Education for the Gifted]. In Gökdere (Eds), Üstün Yetenekliler İçin Fen Eğitimi [Science Education for the Gifted] (pp. 4-16). Pegem Akademi
63. Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Engle Wood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall.
64. Tortop, H.S., & Kunt, K. (2012) İlköğretim öğretmenlerinin üstün yeteneklilerin eğitimine ilişkin tutumlarının incelenmesi [Examination of primary school teachers' attitudes towards the education of gifted students]. International Online Journal of EducationalSciences, 5(2), 441-451. https://doi.org/10.21666/muefd.1030652
65. Tortop, H. S., & Kunt, K. (2013). Investigation of primary school teachers’ attitudes towards gifted education. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(2), 441–451. https://files.eric.gov/fulltext/ED558197.pdf
66. Uzun, M. (2004). Üstün yetenekli çocuklar el kitabı[Gifted children's handbook]. Çocuk Vakfı Yayınları. Vatansever Bayraktar, H., Kadıoğlu Ateş, H., & Afat, N. (2019). An analysis on the relationship between primary school teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs and attitudes towards gifted education. International Journal of Eurasia Social Sciences, 10(32), 1099-1124.
67. Woo, H., Cumming, T. M., & O’Neill, S. C. (2022). South Korean pre-service primary school teachers’ attitudes towards gifted students and gifted education. Gifted Education International, 39(3), 303-317. https://doi.org/10.1177/02614294221108577
68. Yıldız, H. (2015). Pozitif psikolojik sermaye, örgütsel güven ve örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi: bir alan araştırması. Doctoral Disertation. Balıkesir Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Balıkesir.