Özel Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Proje Tabanlı Müfredat Farklılaştırma Örneği

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 2, 419 - 438, 01.06.2021

Çağlar Çetinkaya

https://doi.org/10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.718625

Cited By: 2

Öz

Giriş: Özel yetenekli öğrenciler yaratıcı ve yenilikçi düşünceleri ile ait olduğu topluma yön veren çalışmalar
yapmaktadır. Bahsedilen çalışmaların başında küresel olarak insanları ilgilendiren sorunların çözümüne yönelik
projeler yer almaktadır. Bu çalışmada İstanbul’da öğrenim gören özel yetenekli olarak tespit edilmiş öğrencilerin
proje tabanlı sanal öğrenmeye yönelik becerilerindeki değişimler araştırılmıştır. Sanal proje tabanlı
farklılaştırılmış müfredat eğitiminin öğrencilerin proje tabanlı sanal öğrenme yeterliliklerinde etkili olup
olmadığının incelenmesi araştırmanın amacını oluşturmaktadır.
Yöntem: Yöntem bakımından yarı deneysel modelde boylamsal bir araştırmadır. Çalışma kapsamında 2013-2019
yılları arasında 17 ortaöğrenim düzeyindeki öğrenciye Araştırmada Proje Tabanlı Sanal Öğrenme Yeterlikleri
Ölçeği 3 yıl aralıklarla uygulanarak veriler toplanmış ve analiz edilmiştir.
Bulgular: Çalışmada bağımlı değişken öğrencilerin Proje Tabanlı Sanal Öğrenme Yeterlikleri (PTSÖY) Puanı,
bağımsız değişken proje tabanlı sanal öğrenme eğitimi alma durumudur. Analiz sonuçlarına göre öğrencilerin
proje tabanlı sanal öğrenme becerilerinde olumlu yönde değişmelerin olduğu bulunmuştur.
Tartışma: Bu sonuçlara bağlı olarak özel yetenekli öğrencilerin proje tabanlı sanal öğrenme becerilerini
geliştirilmesi için önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Üstün yetenekliler, müfredat farklılaştırma, sanal öğrenme

Kaynakça

• Betts, G. T. & Kercher, J. J. (2009). The autonomous learner model for the gifted and talented. In Renzulli, J. S. , Gubbins, E. J., McMillen, K. S. ,Erkert, R. D. & Little, C.A. (Eds). System and models for developing the gifted and talented (49-105). Mansfiled Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
• Bildiren, A & Kargın, T. (2019). The effects of project based approach in early ıntervention program on the problem solving ability of gifted children. Education and Science, 44 (198), 343-360. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2019.7360
• Brody, L. E., Muratori, M. C., Stanley, J. C. (2004). Early entrance to college: Academic, social, and emotional considerations. In Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., Gross, M. U. M. (Eds.), A nation deceived: How schools hold back America's brightest students: Volume II (pp. 97–107). Iowa City: The University of Iowa, The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [Data analysis handbook for social science] (3. baskı). Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
• Clark, B. (1997). Social ideologies and gifted education in today’s school. Peabody Journal of Education, 72 (3-4), 81-100. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.1997.9681867
• Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G. & Gross, M. U. M. (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students (Vols. I and II). Iowa City, IA.
• Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Marron, M. A. (2013). Evidence trumps beliefs: Academic acceleration is an effective intervention for high-ability students. In C. M. Callahan & H. L. Hertberg-Davis (Eds.), Fundamentals of gifted education: Considering multiple perspectives (p. 164–175). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
• Coşar, G., Çetinkaya, Ç. & Çetinkaya, Ç. (2015). Investigating the preschool training for gifted and talented students on gifted school teachers’ view. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 3(1) 13-21. DOI: 10.17478/JEGYS.2015110747
• Çelen, B. (2010). Sanal araştırma ortamlarında doğrulayıcı geribildirim kullanımının motivasyona, akademik başarıya ve kalıcı öğrenmeye etkisi [The effects of the use of confirmative feedback in? cyber based drills atmosphere? (cbda) on motivation, academic success and permanent learning] (Yüksek lisans tezi). Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezinden edinilmiştir. (Tez Numarası: 279846)
• Çetinkaya, Ç. (2015). Gifted students and their parents views about the nature education program for gifted children. Oxidation Communications, 38 (1A), 434-444.
• Çetinkaya, Ç. (2014). The effect of gifted students’ creative problem solving program on creative thinking. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3722-3726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.830
• Çetinkaya, Ç. (2013). Sıradışı konular çalışma etkinliklerinin yaratıcılığa etkisi. [The effect of unusual topics study activities on creativity] (Doktora tezi). Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezinden edinilmiştir. (Tez Numarası: 345832).
• Çetinkaya, Ç. (2007). Raven’in ilerleyen matrisler plus testi’nin 6,5-8 yaş çocukları üzerinde geçerlik, güvenirlik, ön norm çalışmaları ve motivasyon stilleri tespiti ile ilişkisinin incelenmesi. [Raven’s progressive matrives plus test’s reliability, validity and pre norm studies on 6,5-8 year old children and the investigation of the relationship between there and the motivation types] (Yüksek lisans tezi). Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezinden edinilmiştir. (Tez Numarası: 330108).
• Çetinkaya, Ç., Maya Çalışkan, İ. & Güngör, H. (2012). Classroom management problems derives from gifted and talented students’ leadership qualities. Sakarya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2 (24), 7-29.
• Demirhan, C. (2002). Program geliştirmede proje tabanlı öğrenme yaklaşımı [Project based learning approach in curriculum development] (Yüksek lisans tezi). Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezinden edinilmiştir. (Tez Numarası: 113538)
• Demirli, C. (2002). Web tabanlı öğretimin öğretim teknolojileri ve materyal geliştirme dersinde öğrenci başarısına etkisi [The effect of Web based teaching on students achievement in instructional technologies and material development course (The sample technical education faculty of F.U.)] (Yüksek lisans tezi). Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezinden edinilmiştir. (Tez Numarası: 122042)
• Erdem, M. & Akkoyunlu, B. (2002). İlköğretim sosyal bilgiler dersi kapsamında beşinci sınıf öğrencileriyle yürütülen ekiple proje tabanlı öğrenme üzerine bir çalışma. Elementary Education Online,1 (1), 2-11.
• Ersoy, A. (2006). İlköğretim beşinci sınıfta teknoloji destekli proje tabanlı öğrenme uygulamaları [Technologically supported project-based learning applications at the fifth grade of primary school] (Doktora tezi). Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezinden edinilmiştir. (Tez Numarası: 191907)
• Feldhusen, J. F., Hansen, J. B. & Kennedy, D. M. (1989). Curriculum development for CGT teachers. Gifted Child Today, 12 (6) 12-19. https://doi.org/10.1177/107621758901200603
• Ford, D. (2003). Desegregating gifted education: Seeking equity for culturally diverse student. In J. H. Borland (Ed.) Rethinking gifted education. (p.143- 158). New York: Pergamon Press.
• Gallagher, S.A. (2009). Adapting problem-based learning for gifted students. In Karnes, F.A. & Bean, S. M. (Eds). Methods and materials for teaching the gifted (3rd Ed) (p.301-330). TX: Prufrock Press Inc.
• Getzels, J. W. & Chikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of the problem finding in art. New York, NY: Wiley.
• Grant, M. M. (2002). Getting a grip on project-based learning: Theory, cases and recommendations. Meridian: A Middle School Computer Technologies Journal, 5, 1-17.
• Huber, J., Treffinger, D. & Tracy, D. (1979). Self instructional use of programmed creativity training materials with gifted and regular students. Journal of Educational Psychology. 71 (3), 303-309. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.71.3.303
• Jenkins- Fiedman, R. (1982). Myth: Cosmetic use of multiple selection criteria. Gifted Child Quarterly. 26, 24-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698628202600108
• Juntune, J. (1982). Myth: The gifted constitutes a single, homogeneous group. Gifted Child Quarterly. 26, 20-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698628202600102
• Kaptan, F. & Korkmaz, H. (2002), Fen eğitiminde proje tabanlı öğrenme yaklaşımının ilköğretim öğrencilerinin akademik başarı, akademik benlik kavramı ve çalışma sürelerine etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22, 91-97.
• Kaptan, S. (1993). Bilimsel araştırma ve istatistik teknikleri [Rerearch and Statistic Technigues] (10. baskı). Ankara: Rehber Yayınevi
• Kulik, J.A. & Kulik, C.C. (1997). Effect of ability grouping on student achievement. Equity and Exclellence. 22-30 https://doi.org/10.1080/1066568870230105
• Land, S. M. & Greene, B. A. (1999). Project-based learning with the world wide web: a qualitative study of resource ıntegration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48, 45-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02313485
• Lee, C. & Tsai, F.Y. (2004). Internet project based learning environment: the effects of thinking styles on learning transfer. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(1), 31-39, Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00063.x
• Lessinger, L. M. & Seagoe, M. V. (1963). The nature of enrichment for gifted students. The journal of Educational Reearch, 57 (3), 142-494. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1963.10883045
• Maker, C. J. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Austin, TX: Pro Ed.
• Maker, J. C. & Nielson, A. B. (1996). Curriculum development and teaching strategies for gifted learners (2nd Ed) Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
• Manzanares, M. G. (2004). Attitudes of Counseling Students‟ Use of Web-Based Instruction for Online and Supplemental Instruction in a Master‟s Degree Program of Study. Doctoral Thesis, Colorado State University, Colorado.
• Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education] (2014). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı okul öncesi eğitim ve ilköğretim kurumlar yönetmeliği. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2014/07/20140726-4.htm adresinden edinilmiştir.
• Morgan, W. H. (1958). Providing for the gifted. The High School Journal, 42 (2), 34-45
• Navan, J. L. (2002). Enhancing the achievement of all learners menas high ability students too. Middle School Journal, 32 (4), 45-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2002.11495353
• Norton, M. S. (1959). Current provision for the gifted. The clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 33 (7), 425-428. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.1959.11476600
• Nosich, G. M. (2012). Eleştire düşünme ve disiplinlerarası düşünme rehberi. Çev. Birsel Ayberk. Ankara: Anı Yayıncıclık.
• Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: A how-to guide for educational excellence (2nd ed.). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press
• Renzulli, J. & Reis, S. (1985). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensve plan for the development of creative productivity. In N Colangelo and G. A. Davis Eds. Handbook of Gifted Education. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
• Roberts, J. L. (2005). Enrichment opportunities for gifted learners. Waco, Tx: Prufrock Press.
• Robinson, N.M. (2004). Effects of academic acceleration on the social-emotional status of gifted students. In N. Colangelo, S. G. Assouline , & M. U. M. Gross (Eds.), A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students (Vol. II, pp.59-67). Iowa City, IA: Connie Belin and Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
• Robinson, A., Shore, B. M. & Enersen, D. L. (2007). Best practices in gifted education: An evidence-based guide. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press Inc.
• Rogers, K. B. (2007). Lessons learned about educating the gifted and talented: A synthesis of the research on educational practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 382-396. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207306324
• Rogers, K. B. (2004). The academic effects of acceleration. In N. Colangelo, S. Assouline, & M. U. M. Gross (Eds.), A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students (Vol. 2, pp. 47–57). Iowa City: University of Iowa, The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development
• Runko, M. A. (2006). Reasoning and personal creativity. In Kaufman, J. C. &Bear, J. (Eds). Creativity and reason in cognitive development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Scott, M. T. (2014). Multicultural differentiated instruction for gifted students. In A. F. Rotatori, J. P. Bakken & F. E. Obiakor (Eds). Gifted Education: Current perspective and issues, (147-166). Emerald Group Publishing.
• Siegle, D., Wilson, H. E., & Little, C. A. (2013). A sample of gifted and talented educators’ attitudes about academic acceleration. Journal of Advanced Academics, 24, 26-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X12472491
• Simpson, J. (2014). A case study enrichment seminar and gifted adolescents. Gifted and Talented International, 29, (1-2), 63-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2014.11678430
• Southern ,W. T. & Jones, E. D. (2004). Types of acceleration: Dimensions and issues. In N. Colangelo, S. G. Assouline M.U.M. Gross (Eds). A Nation deceived: How school hold back America’s brigshest students, 2, 5-12. Iowa City, IA: The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
• Şahin, F. (2018). Eğitsel stratejiler ve örneklerle zenginleştirilmiş müfredat farklılaştırma modelleri [Enriched Curriculum differentiation model with educational strategies and samples]. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
• Şahin, F. (2015). Educational programs, services and support for gifted students in Turkey. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 11 (4), 1207-1223.
• Şahin, F & Çetinkaya, Ç. (2015). 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.
• Şahin, F & Kargın, T. (2013). The effect of a training programme on teachers’ knowledge on identification of talented students by primary school teachers. Ankara University Faculty of Educational Sciences Journal of Special Education, 14(2), 1-15.
• Şahin, F., Özer, E & Deniz, M. E. (2016). The predictive level of emotional ıntelligence for the domain-specific creativity: A study on gifted students. Education and Science, 41 (183), 181-197.
• Tannenbaum, A. J. (2000). A history of giftedness in the school and society. International Handbook of Gifted and Talent, 2, 23-53.
• Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. San Rafael, CA: Autodesk Foundation.
• Tomlinson, C.A. (2013). Differentiated instruction. In C. M. Callahan & H.L. Herberg-Davis (Eds), Fundamentals of gifted education: Considering multiple perspective, 287-300. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Tomlinson, C. A. (2009). The parallel curriculum: A design to develop high potential and challenge high ability learners. In Renzulli, J. S. , Gubbins, E. J., McMillen, K. S. ,Erkert, R. D. & Little, C.A. (Eds). System and models for developing the gifted and talented (571-599). Mansfiled Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
• Torrance, E. P. (1972). Can we teach children to think creatively?. Journal of Creative Behavior, 6(2), 114-143. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1972.tb00923.x
• Treffinger, D. J. (1982). Gifted students, regular classroom: Sixty ingredients for a better blend. The Elementary School Journal, 82 (3), 267-273. https://doi.org/10.1086/461264
• Trefinger, D. J & Selby, E. C. (2009). Levels of service: A contemporary approach to programming for talent development. In Renzulli, J. S. , Gubbins, E. J., McMillen, K. S. ,Erkert, R. D. & Little, C.A. (Eds). System and models for developing the gifted and talented (629-655). Mansfiled Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
• Tsai, D. M. (2007). Differentiating curriculum for gifted students by providing accelerated options. Gifted Education Journal, 23 (1), 88-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/026142940702300111
• VanTasel Baska, J. (2003). Content based curriculum for high ability learners: An introduction. Waco, TX: Profrook Press.
• VanTasel Baska, J. & Stambaugh, T. (2005). Challenges and possibilities for serving gifted learners in the regular classroom. Theory Into Pratice. 44, 211-217. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4403_5
• Ward, C. (2010). Using online learning environments to support advanced learners. In J. Sanchez ve K. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, 377-381
• Xenos Whiston, M. & Leroux, J. A. (1992). Gifted Education: Isn’t this good for all children?. Middle School Journal, 23 (4), 36-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.1992.11496061
• Yılmaz, Ö. (2012). Proje tabanlı sanal öğrenme yeterlilikleri (PTSÖY) ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi ve psikometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesi [Development of the scale of Project Based Virtual Learning Qualifications (PBVLQ) and examination of its psychometric properties] (Yükseklisans tezi). Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezinden edinilmiştir. (Tez Numarası: 306490)