The Needs of Gifted Middle School Students for Developing an Effective Mathematics Program

Öz

This study aims to determine the needs of gifted middle school students for developing an effective mathematics program. In particular, this needs assessment study was conducted to reveal the gap between practice and expected situation in the implementation of the Turkish middle school mathematics program. The data were gathered from 60 gifted students and two mathematics teachers. Mixed methods research was used in this study. According to the results, the primary needs were determined as developing an enriched mathematics program. This program should include a more comprehensive and deep knowledge of content, interesting topics, and mastery of arithmetic skills. Also, the effective use of information and communication technologies should be supported by the program. Instead of the direct teaching method, inquiry-based learning should be applied in the classrooms. In addition, real-life applications outside the classroom should be embedded in the program. Mathematical tools and materials should be provided to create a mathematics laboratory environment. On the other hand, mathematically gifted students should be identified and some workshops should be prepared for supporting their special needs. The accelerated mathematics program can be used for mathematically gifted students. Basic proof methods and abstract thinking skills can be included in the program designed for mathematically gifted students.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• gifted students
• mathematics program
• need assessment study

Kaynakça

1. Abu, N. K., Akkanat, Ç., & Gokdere, M. (2017). Teachers’ views about the education of gifted students in regular classrooms. Turkish Journal of Giftedness and Education, 7(2), 87-109.
2. Akarsu, F. (2004). Üstün Zihinsel Yeteneklilerin Eğitiminde Sorunlar [Problems in Education of the Gifted], Üstün Yetenekli Çocuklar Seçilmis Makaleler Kitabı [Book of Selected Articles for Gifted Children]. Istanbul: Child Foundation Publishing.
3. Akgul, G. (2021). Teachers’ metaphors and views about gifted students and their education. Gifted Education International, 37(3), 273-289.
4. Assouline, S. G., & Lupkowski-Shoplik, A. (2011). Developing math talent: A comprehensive guide to math education for gifted students in elementary and middle school. Prufrock Press.
5. Ataman, A. (2004). Üstün yetenekli/zekalı çocuk ile yaşamak [Living with gifted/talented child]. Book of Selected Articles for Gifted Children, 56-72.
6. Aygun, B. (2010). The Needs Anaysis of the Mathematics Programme fort he Gifted Students Attending Lower Secondary Education Schools. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Hacettepe University, Ankara.
7. Baykoc, N. (2010). Üstün ve Özel Yetenekli Çocuklar ve Eğitimleri. [Gifted and Talented Children and Their Education]. N.Baykoç (ed. 2010), Öğretmenlik Programları için Özel Eğitim [Special Education for Teacher Education Programs] (pp. 301-337). Ankara: Gunduz Education and Publishing.
8. Boran, M., & Karakus, F. (2021). The Mediator Role of Critical Thinking Disposition in the Relationship between Perceived Problem-Solving Skills and Metacognitive Awareness of Gifted and Talented Students. Participatory Educational Research, 9(1), 61-72.

9. Bronkhorst, E., Drent, S., Hulsbeek, M., Steenbergen-Penternman, N. & van der Veer, M. (2001). Project leerstofontwikkeling voor hoogbegaafde leerlingen op het gebied van Nederlandse taal. Enschede: Stichting Leerplanontwikkeling
10. Campbell, J. R., & Walberg, H. J. (2011). Olympiad studies: Competitions provide alternatives to developing talents that serve national interests. Roeper Review, 33(1), 8-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2011.530202
11. Cetin, A., & Unsal, S. (2018). Social, psychological effects of central examinations on teachers and their reflections on teachers’ curriculum implementations. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 34(2), 304-323.https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2018040672
12. Chan, D.W. (2001). Learning styles of gifted and non-gifted secondary students in Hong Kong. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45(1), 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620104500106
13. Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). An expanded typology for classifying mixed methods research into designs. A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie, Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, 209-240.
14. Davidson, J., Davidson, B., & Vanderkam, L. (2007). Genius denied: How to stop wasting our brightest young minds. Simon and Schuster.
15. Deringol Karatas, Y. (2013). The effect of differentiated mathematics teaching on achievement, creativity, attitude and academic self-concept concerning gifted and talented students. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). İstanbul University, İstanbul.
16. Dimitriadis, C. (2011). Provision for mathematically gifted children in primary schools: An investigation of four different methods of organizational provision. Educational Review, 64(2), 241–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2011.598920
17. Dixon, F., Cassady, J., Cross, T., & Williams, D. (2005). Effects of technology on critical thinking and essay writing among gifted adolescents. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 180–189. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2005-482
18. 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.
19. Fiedler, E. D., Lange, R. E., & Winebrenner, S. (2002). In search of reality: Unraveling myths about tracking, ability grouping, and the gifted. Roeper Review, 24, 108-112. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190209554142
20. Gadanidis, G., Hughes, J., & Cordy, M. (2011). Mathematics for gifted students in an arts- and technology-rich setting. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34(3), 397–433. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235321103400303
21. Gagné, F. (2015). Academic talent development programs: A best practices model. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(2), 281-295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-015-9366-9
22. Gamoran, A. (1992). The variable effects of high school tracking. American Sociological Review, 57(6), 812-828. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096125
23. Gross, M.U.M., MacLeod, B., Drummond, D., Merrick, C. (2001). Gifted Students in primary schools: Differentiating the curriculum. Sydney: GERRIC, University of New South Wales.
24. Heacox, D., & Cash, R. M. (2020). Differentiation for gifted learners: Going beyond the basics. Free Spirit Publishing.
25. Hébert, T. P., & Neumeister, K. L. S. (2000). University mentors in the elementary classroom: Supporting the intellectual, motivational, and emotional needs of high-ability students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 24, 122-148. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320002400202
26. Jensen, A. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York: The Free Press.
27. Johnson, D. T. (2000). Teaching mathematics to gifted students in a mixed-ability classroom. Reston, VA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education.
28. Kanevsky, L. (2011). Deferential differentiation: what types of differentiation do students want? Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(4), 279-299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986211422098
29. Karaduman, G. B. (2010). Üstün yetenekli öğrenciler için uygulanan farklılaştırılmış matematik eğitim programları [Differentiated mathematics education programs for gifted students]. HAYEF Journal of Education, 7(1), 1-12. https://hayefjournal.org/Content/files/sayilar/94/1.pdf
30. Karatas Aydın, F.I., & Isıksal Bostan, M. (2021). Engineering based modelling experiences of gifted students: An example of eco-friendly car. EDULEARN 21 Proceedings, 6733-6737. Spain.
31. Kaya, F. (2015). Teachers’ conceptions of giftedness and special needs of gifted students. Education and Science, 40(177), 59-74.
32. Levent, F., & Bakioglu, A. (2013). Suggestions for gifted education in Turkey. Journal of Gifted Education Research, 1(1), 31-44.
33. Levine, M. (2003). Celebrating diverse minds. Educational Leadership, 61(2), 12-18.
34. Maker, C., & Nielson, A. B. (1996). Curriculum development and teaching strategies for gifted learners. PRO-ED, Austin.
35. McCoach, D. B., Rambo, K. E., & Welsh, M. (2013). Assessing the growth of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 57(1), 56-67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986212463873
36. McCoach, D.B., & Siegle, D. (2007). What predicts teachers’ attitudes toward the gifted? Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 246-255. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207302719
37. McDaniel, T. R. (2002). Mainstreaming the gifted: Historical perspectives on excellence and equity. Roeper Review, 24(3), 112-114. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190209554144
38. Miedijensky, S., & Tal, T. (2016). Reflection and assessment for learning in science enrichment courses for the gifted. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 50, 1-13.
39. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education] (MoNE) (2012). Bilim Sanat Merkezi Yönergesi[Science and Art Center Directive]http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/2593_0.html
40. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education] (MoNE) (2018). Ortaokul matematik dersi (5, 6, 7, ve 8. Sınıflar) ögretim programı [Middle school mathematics curriculum grades 5 to 8]. Ankara, Turkey: Author.
41. National Association for Gifted Children. (2005). State of the states 2004–2005. Washington, DC: Author.
42. National Association for Gifted Children. (2010). NAGC Pre-K-Grade 12 gifted programming standards. http://www.nagc.org/index.aspx?id=546
43. National Association for Gifted Children. (2014). Gifted by state. http://www.nagc.org/resources-publications/gifted-state
44. Ozdemir, D., & Isiksal Bostan, M. (2021). A design based study: characteristics of differentiated tasks for mathematically gifted students. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(3), 125-144. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/10995
45. Ozden, B. (2015). Research on severol vari̇ables of emoti̇onal i̇ntelli̇gence leves of gi̇fted chi̇ldren from a management sci̇ence perspecti̇ve. (Unpublished master’ thesis). İstanbul Gelişim University, İstanbul.
46. Ozgur, S. D., & Yılmaz, A. (2017). The effect of inquiry-based learning on gifted and talented students’ understanding of acids-bases concepts and motivation. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(6), 994.
47. Ozyaprak, M. (2016). Üstün Zekâli Ve Yetenekli Ögrenciler Için Matematik Müfredatinin Farklilastirilmasi [Differentiating Mathematics Curriculum for Gifted and Talented Students]. HAYEF: Journal of Education, 13(2), 115.
48. Pfeiffer, S. I., Shaunessy-Dedrick, E. E., & Foley-Nicpon, M. E. (2018). APA handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. xxi-691). American Psychological Association.
49. Renzulli, J. S. (2012). Reexamining the role of gifted education and talent development for the 21st century: A four-part theoretical approach. Gifted child quarterly, 56(3),150-159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986212444901
50. Renzulli, J. S. (2016). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for promoting creative productivity. Prufrock Press Inc.
51. Riley, T. L. (2011). Competitions for showcasting innovative and creative talents. Gifted and Talented International, 26(1-2), 63-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2011.11673589
52. Robinson, A., & Clinkenbeard, P. R. (2008). History of giftedness: Perspectives from the past presage modern scholarship. Handbook of giftedness in children, 13-31.
53. Rogers, K. B. (2002). Grouping the gifted and talented: Questions and answers. Roeper Review, 24(3), 103-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190209554140
54. Sak, U. (2011). An overview and social validity of the education programs for talented students model (EPTS). Education and Science, 36(161), 213-229.
55. Sekowski, A., Siekanska, M., & Klinkosz, W. (2009). On individual differences in giftedness. In International handbook on giftedness (pp. 467-485). Springer, Dordrecht.
56. Sen, C., Ay, Z. S., & Kiray, S. A. (2021). Computational thinking skills of gifted and talented students in integrated STEM activities based on the engineering design process: The case of robotics and 3D robot modeling. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 42, 100931.
57. Sternberg, R. J. (2018). Theories of intelligence. In S. I. Pfeiffer, E. Shaunessy-Dedrick, & M. Foley-Nicpon (Eds.), APA handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 145–161). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000038-010
58. Sternberg, R. J. (2020). Transformational giftedness: Rethinking our paradigm for gifted education. Roeper Review, 42(4), 230-240. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2020.1815266
59. Tanner, D., & Tanner, L. M. (1980). Curriculum development: Theory into practice (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
60. Terman, L. M. (1925). Genetic studies of genius, Vol. 1: Mental and physical traits of one thousand gifted children. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
61. Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Ascd.
62. Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., ... & Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2-3), 119-145. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320302700203
63. VanTassel-Baska, J. & Stambaugh, T. (2005). Challenges and possibilities for serving gifted learners in the regular classroom. Theory Into Practice, 44(3), 211-217. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4403_5
64. VanTassel-Baska, J., & Brown, E. F. (2007). Toward best practice: An analysis of the efficacy of curriculum models in gifted education. Gifted child quarterly, 51(4),342-358. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207306323
65. VanTassel-Baska, J., Hubbard, G. F., & Robbins, J. I. (2021). Differentiation of instruction for gifted learners: Collated evaluative studies of teacher classroom practices. Handbook of Giftedness and Talent Development in the Asia-Pacific, 945-979.
66. Wallace, P. (2005). Distance education for gifted students: Leveraging technology to expand academic programs. High Ability Studies, 16(1), 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598130500115288
67. Winebrenner, S. & Brulles, D. (2012). Teaching gifted kids in today’s classroom: Strategies and techniques every teacher can use. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing Inc.
68. Yıldırım, A. & Simsek H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
69. Ysseldyke, J., Tardrew, S., Betts, J., Thill, T., & Hannigan, E. (2004). Use of an instructional management system to enhance math instruction of gifted and talented students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(4), 293-310. https://doi.org/10.4219/jeg-2004-319