Gifted education in Turkiye from the perspectives on Science and Art Centers (SAC) : issues and suggestions

Abstract

There are substantial expectations from gifted students while countries design the framework of their long-term programs. In this sense, developing countries like Turkey tend to comprehensive investments in gifted education. However, there is still no comprehensive content related to this field that boosts gifted student talents significantly, especially in science education. In this respect, it is crucial to develop inclusive content that can fully satisfy the needs of these students. In this direction, SACs were established in 1995 to bring to life practice-based education for special students in three domains: painting, music, and general talent. Training is carried out in four stages; resource education, recognizing individual talents, enhancing special talents, and project-based programs. These stages proceed in parallel with the student's grade level. In-course applications are provided to students in the form of small-group studies. Despite satisfying gains, there is a risk that these institutions are gradually losing ground and turning into ordinary formal education institutions parallel to their increasing prevalence. It is important to renovate these institutions, which each administration shapes within the framework of its perspective, by presenting a comprehensive vision. Since it is not fully determined the essence of why SACs were established and the ultimate goal of these institutions, they are currently oscillating between being closed and being developed. In this context, a review study was carried out on certain controversial issues and the aim was to express the basic deficiencies in these institutions from the perspective of a SAC teacher. Within the scope of this study, the problem areas are summarized under five frames; diagnosis, teacher, student, content, and institution. Additionally, some suggestions are introduced and an educational model is described to inform policymakers.

Keywords

• SAC
• Education models for gifted
• Gifted education in Turkiye
• Gifted students

Supporting Institution

This project received no financial support for the research.

Ethical Statement

There is no conflict of interest for the research. I assure you that this study has not been published anywhere or is not in the process of being published.

References

1. Anuruthwong, U. (2017). Education for the gifted/talented in Thailand. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1332825.
2. Bakioğlu, A., & Levent, F. (2013). Suggestions for gifted education in turkey. Journal of Gifted Education Research, 1(1), 31-44.
3. Bracken, B.A., & Brown, E.F. (2006). Behavioral identification and assessment of gifted and talented students. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 24, 112 - 122.
4. Callahan, C.M., Moon, T.R., & Oh, S.S. (2017). Describing the status of programs for the gifted. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40, 20 - 49.
5. Clarke, A.M., & Clarke, A.D. (1976). Early experience and the life path. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
6. Freeman, J. (1979). Gifted children: their identification and development in a social context. Lancaster: MTP Press.
7. Gallagher, J.J. (2008). Handbook of giftedness in children, Springer.
8. Grigorenko, E.L. (2017). Gifted education in Russia: Developing, threshold, or developed. Cogent Education, 4.

9. Gross, M.U.M. (2000). Issues in the cognitive development of exceptionally and profoundly gifted individuals. In
10. K.A. Heller, F.J. Monks, R.J. Sternberg and R.F. Subotnik (Eds.) International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent (2nd Edition) (pp. 179-192). Oxford: Pergamon
11. Hampshire, A., Highfield, R. R., Parkin, B. L., & Owen, A. M. (2012). Fractionating human intelligence, Neuron, 76(6), 1225-1237.
12. Hedman, A.M. (2013). Brain Plasticity, Intelligence and Schizophrenia: influence of genes and environment. Doctoral dissertation, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherland.
13. Hodges, J., Tay, J., Maeda, Y., & Gentry, M. (2018). A meta-analysis of gifted and talented identification practices. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62, 147 - 174.
14. Ismail, S.A., Alghawi, M.A., & Alsuwaidi, K.A. (2022). Gifted education in United Arab Emirates: Analyses from a learning-resource perspective. Cogent Education, 9.
15. Köprü, F., & Ayas, M. B. (2020). An investigation of the criterion validity of Anadolu Sak Intelligence Scale (ASIS): The case of EPTS. Talent, 10(2), 110-128.
16. Kurnaz, A., & (Gökdemir) Ekici, S. (2020). BİLSEM tanılama sürecinde kullanılan zeka testlerinin psikolojik danışmanların ve bilsem öğretmenlerinin görüşlerine göre değerlendirilmesi. Çocuk ve Medeniyet, 5(10), 365- 399.
17. Laili, N., Sabila, N.S., Vibraena, V.M., Junaidi, A.R., & Dewantoro, D.A. (2020). Gifted education in ASEAN. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 87, 6-13.
18. Ministry of National Education of Turkiye (MoNET) (2024). Science & Art Center Directive https://orgm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2016_ 10/07031350_ bilsem_yonergesi.pdf. 1-15.
19. National Association for Gifted Children (2010). Pre-K–Grade 12 Gifted Programming Standards: A blueprint for quality gifted education programs. Washington, DC: Author.
20. Pfeiffer, S. I. (2003). Challenges and opportunities for students who are gifted: What the experts say. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 161-169.
21. Phelps, C., Brazzolotto, M., & Shaughnessy, M.F. (2023). Identification and teaching practices that support inclusion in gifted education. Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity, 10(1), 1-9.
22. Reid, E. (2015). development of gifted education and an overview of gifted education in the usa, canada, equator. Slavonic Pedagogical Studies Journal 4(2), 241-247.
23. Reid, E., & Horváthová, B. (2016). Teacher training programs for gifted education with focus on sustainability. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 18, 66 - 74.
24. Sak, U., & Shaughnessy, M. F. (2020). An Interview with Ugur Sak: Intelligence Testing in Turkey. North American Journal of Psychology, 22(2), 167-172.
25. Setiawan, R., & Septiarti, S.W. (2019). A review on indonesia policy in supporting gifted students education. Proceedings of the International Conference on Special and Inclusive Education (ICSIE 2018).
26. Shenk, D.W. (2017). What is the Flynn Effect, and how does it change our understanding of IQ? Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science, 8, 1-2.
27. Sumpter, L., & Sternevik, E. (2013). Prospective teachers’ conceptions of what characterize a gifted student in mathematics. MAVI Mathematical Views 18th Conference, Helsinki, September 12 to September 15.
28. Svendsen, D. (1983). Factors related to changes in IQ: a follow-up study of former slow learners. J Child Psychol Psychiatry, 24, 405–413.
29. Şahin, F., & Çetinkaya, Ç. (2023). An investigation of the effectiveness and efficiency of classroom teachers in the identification of gifted students. Turkish Journal of Giftedness and Education, 5(2), 133-146
30. Tamul, Ö.F., Sezerel, B.B., Sak, U., & Karabacak, F. (2020). Anadolu-Sak zekâ ölçeğinin (asis) sosyal geçerlik çalışması. PAU Journal of Education, 49, 393-412.
31. URL-1https://www.meb.gov.tr/BILSEM’-ogrenci-tanilama-ve-yerlestirme-kilavuzu-yayimlandi/haber/28402/tr Access date: January, 2024
32. URL-2 https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/smartest-countries Access date: January, 2024
33. URL-3 https://www.meb.gov.tr/BILSEM’lere-yerlestirme-sonuclari-aciklandi/haber/19174/tr#:~:text=B%C4% B0LSEM%20yerle%C5%9Ftirme%20sonu%C3%A7lar%C4%B1na%20g%C3%B6re%2C%2020,63%20bin%2095'e%20y%C3%BCkseldi.