Kanıta Dayalı Araştırma: Erken Çocukluk Dönemindeki Zihinsel Alanda Üstün Yetenekli Çocuklara Eğitsel Müdahaleler Üzerine Yapılmış Araştırmaların İncelenmesi1

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 2, 300 - 322, 31.12.2015

Tuğba Ortaargun Feyzullah Şahin

Öz

Son 30 yıllık literatürü içeren bir araştırma, erken çocukluk dönemindeki üstün zekâlı

çocuklar (intellectual gifted child) için etkili bir müdahaleyi kapsayan bir araştırmanın eksikliğini

ortaya çıkardı. Genç üstün zekâlı çocuklar (young gifted children) için eğitsel hizmetler konulu 11

deneysel çalışmanın bulguları belirlendi ve çalışmaların metodolojik uygunluğu incelendi.

Örneklem boyutları, üstün zekâlılığın tanımı, deneysel çalışmalardaki zorluklar, üstün zekâlı

çocuklarda kullanılan uygun standartlaştırılmış ölçümleri bulma ve programın sonuçlarının

ölçümüyle ilgili konularda genç üstün zekâlı çocuklarla yapılan araştırmaların problemli yönleri

tartışıldı. Erken çocukluk üstün zekâlılık eğitimi alanı araştırmalarındaki gelecek araştırmaların

güçlendirilmesi için önerilerde bulunuldu.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Üstün zekâlı eğitimi, Erken çocukluk, Kanıta dayalı uygulama

Kaynakça

• Adkins, D., & Ballif, B. (1973). Animal crackers: A test of motivation to achieve. Monterey, CA: McGraw-Hill.
• American Educational Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35, 33-40.
• Barbour, N., Shaklee, B. D. (1998). Gifted education meets Reggio Emilia: Visions for curriculum in gifted education for young children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 228-237.
• Borland, J. H. (1989). Planning and implementing programs for the gifted. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
• Carter, K. R. (1991). Evaluation of gifted programs. In N. K. Buchanan & J. F. Feldhusen (Eds.), Conducting research and evaluation in gifted education (pp. 245-274). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
• Carter, K. R. (1992). A model for evaluating programs for the gifted under non-experimental conditions. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15, 266-283.
• Castillo, L. C. (1998). The effect of analogy instruction on young children’s metaphor comprehension. Roeper Review, 21, 27-31.
• Chamberlin, S. A., Buchanan, M., Vercimak, D. (2007). Serving twice-exceptional preschoolers: Blending gifted education and early childhood special education practices in assessment and program planning. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30, 372-393.
• Coates, D., Thompson, W., Shimmin, A. (2008). Using learning journeys to develop a challenging curriculum for gifted children in a nursery (kindergarten) setting. Gifted and Talented International, 23, 97-104.
• Diezmann, C. M., English, L. D. (2001). Developing young children’s multidigit number sense. Roeper Review, 24, 11-13.
• Diezmann, C. M., Watters, J. J. (1997). Bright but bored: Optimising the environment for gifted children. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 22(2), 17-21.
• Foster, W. (1986). The application of single subject research methods to the study of exceptional ability and extraordinary achievement. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 33-37.
• Gagné, F. Y. (2003). Transforming gifts into talents: The DMGT as a developmental theory. In N. Colangelo and G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 60-74). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Gagné, F. Y., Gagnier, N. (2004). The socio-affective and academic impact of early entrance to school. Roeper Review, 26, 128-138.
• Hanninen, G. E. (1984). Effectiveness of a preschool program for the gifted and talented. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 7, 192-204.
• Hensel, N. H. (1991). Social leadership skills in young children. Roeper Review, 14, 4-6.
• Hertzog, N. B., Klein, M. M., Katz, L. G. (1999). Hypothesizing and theorizing: Challenge in an early childhood curriculum. Gifted and Talented International, 14, 38-49.
• 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.
• Jolly, J. L., Kettler, T. (2008). Gifted education research 1994-2003: A disconnect between priorities and practice. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 31, 427-446.
• Karnes, M. B., Brown, J. G., Shwedel, A. M., Svoboda, M. H. (1980). RAPYHT project talent assessment checklist. Urbana: University of Illinois.
• Karnes, M. B., Johnson, L. J. (1987a). An imperative: Programming for the young gifted/ talented. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 10, 195-214.
• Karnes, M. B., Johnson, L. J. (1987b). Bringing out Head Start talents: Findings from the field. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31, 174-179.
• Karnes, M. B., Shwedel, A. M., Lewis, G. F. (1983a). Long-term effects of early programming for the gifted/talented handicapped. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 6, 266-278.
• Karnes, M. B., Shwedel, A. M., Lewis, G. F. (1983b). Short-term effects of early programming for the young gifted handicapped child. Exceptional Children, 50, 103-109.
• Karnes, M. B., Shwedel, A. M., Linnemeyer, S. A. (1982). The young gifted/talented child: Programs at the University of Illinois. Elementary School Journal, 12, 195-213.
• Kaufman, A. S., Kaufman, N. L. (1982). Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.
• Kitano, M. K., Perez, R. I. (1998). Developing the potential of young gifted children from lowincome and culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. In J. F. Smutny (Ed.), The young gifted child: Potential and promise, an anthology, (pp. 119-132). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
• Koshy, V., Robinson, N. M. (2006). Too long neglected: Gifted young children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 14, 113-126.
• Kulik, J. A., Kulik, C.-L. C. C. (1984). Effects of accelerated instruction on students. Review of Educational Research, 54, 409-425.
• Maker, C. J. (1986). Suggested principles for gifted preschool curricula. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 6, 62-73.x
• Maker, C. J., & Schiever, S. W. (2005). Teaching models in education of the gifted (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
• Marland, S.P. (1972). Education of the Gifted and Talented. Report to the Congress of the United States by the US Commissioner of Education. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
• Mathews, F. N., Burns, J. M. (1992). A parent evaluation of a public preschool gifted program. Roeper Review, 15, 69-72.
• McMillan, J. H., Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education: Evidence-based enquiry (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson and AB.
• Meador, K. S. (1994). The effects of synectics training on gifted and nongifted kindergarten students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 18, 55-73.
• Milchus, M. J., Farrah, G. A., Reitz, W. (1967). SCAMIN self-concept and motivation inventory. Dearborn Heights, MI: Person-O-Metrics.
• Morgan, A. (2007). Experiences of a gifted and talented enrichment cluster for pupils aged five to seven. British Journal of Special Education, 34, 114-153.
• Obrzut, A., Nelson, R. B., Obrzut, J. E. (1984). Early school entrance for intellectually superior children: An analysis. Psychology in the Schools, 21, 71-77.
• Passow, H. A. (1982). Differentiated curricula for the gifted/talented. Ventura, CA: Ventura County Superintendent of Schools Office.
• Proctor, T. B., Black, K. N., Feldhusen, J. F. (1986). Early admission of selected children to elementary school: A review of the research literature. Journal of Educational Research,80, 70-76.
• Quay, H. C. (1979). Classification. In H. C. Quay and J. S. Werry (Eds.), Psychopathological disorders of childhood (2nd ed., pp. 1-42). New York, NY: Wiley.
• Robinson, A., Shore, B. M., Enerson, D. L. (2007). Best practices in gifted education: An evidencebased guide. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
• Robinson, N. M. (2000). Giftedness in very young children: How seriously should it be taken? In R. C. S. Friedman and B. M. Shore (Ed.), Talents unfolding: Cognition and development (pp. 7-26). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Robinson, N. M. (2008). Early childhood. In J. A. Plucker and C. M. Callahan (Eds.), Critical issues and practices in gifted education: What the research says (pp. 179-194). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
• Robinson, N. M., Abbott, R. D., Berninger, V. W., Busse, J., Mukhopadhyay, S. (1997).
• Developmental changes in mathematically precocious young children: Longitudinal and gender effects. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 145-158.
• Robinson, N. M., Reis, S. M., Neihart, M., Moon, S. M. (2002). Social and emotional issues facing gifted and talented students: What have we learned and what should we do now? In M. Neihart, S. M. Reis, N. M. Robinson, & S. M. Moon (Eds.), The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 267–288). Washington, DC: The National Association for Gifted Children.
• Rogers, K. B. (1992). A best-evidence synthesis of the research on acceleration for gifted learners. In N. Colangelo, S. G. Assouline, and D. L. Ambroson (Eds.), Talent development: Proceedings from the 1991 Henry B. and Jocelyn Wallace national symposium on talent development (pp. 406-409). Unionville, NY: Trillium.
• Rosenbusch, M. H., Draper, D. C. (1985). Gifted preschoolers: Learning Spanish as a second language. Roeper Review, 7, 209-212.
• Science Research Associates Inc. (1985). Survey of basic skills (Form P). Chicago, IL: Author. Simonsen, B., Little, C. A. (2011). Single-subject research in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55, 158-162.
• Simonsen, B., Little, C. A., Fairbanks, S. (2010). Effects of task difficulty and teacher attention on the off-task behaviour of high-ability students with behavior issues. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34, 245-260.
• Smutny, J. F. (1999). A special focus on young gifted children. Roeper Review, 21, 172-173. Swassing, R. H., Amidon, S. R. (1991). Single-subject research with gifted and talented students. In N. K. Buchanan & J. F. Feldhusen (Eds.), Conducting research and valuation in gifted education: A handbook of methods and applications. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
• Terman, L. M. (1925). Genetic studies of genius: Mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted children (Vol. 1). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Thorndike, R. L., Hagen, E. P., Sattler, J. M. (1986). The Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scale: Fourth edition. Chicago, IL: Riverside.
• Torrance, E. P. (1981). Thinking creatively in action and movement. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.
• Torrance, E. P. (1998). The Torrance tests of creative thinking norms—Technical manual figural (streamlined) forms A & B. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.
• Troia, G. (1999). Phonological awareness intervention research: A critical review of the experimental methodology. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 28-52.
• VanTassel-Baska, J., Schuler, A., Lipschutz, J. (1982). An experimental program for gifted four year olds. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 5, 45-55.
• Wadlington, E., Burns, J. M. (1993). Math instructional practices within preschool/kindergarten gifted programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 17, 41-52.
• Walsh, R. L., Hodge, K. A., Bowes, J. M., Kemp, C. R. (2010). Same age, different page: Catering for young gifted children in prior-to-school settings. International Journal of Early Childhood, 42, 43-58.
• White, K., Fletcher-Campbell, F., Ridley, K. (2003). What works for gifted and talented pupils: A review of recent research. Slough, Berkshire, England: National Foundation for Educational Research.
• Ziegler, A., Raul, T. (2000). Myth and reality: A review of empirical studies on giftedness. High Ability Studies, 11, 113-136.