The effects of science teaching differentiated according to the grid model
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.11.04.14Keywords:
Grid Model, Science Teaching, creative thinking, problem-solving skills and attitudesAbstract
The aim of this study is to determine the effect of science lesson activities prepared in accordance with the components and steps of the grid model on the creative thinking skills, problem solving skills and attitudes of gifted students. In this study, pre-test and post-test design with the control group were utilized among the experimental designs. The study group consists of 43 students (23 of them are in the experimental group, 21 of them are in the control group), who are 9-10 years old and are known as gifted students, and continue to attend the same Science and Art Center (BİLSEM) in the city of Istanbul. The analysis revealed that the differentiated implementations of Science according to the Grid Model had a significant impact on the creative thinking and problem-solving skills and attitudes of gifted students. .In this study, the "Problem Solving Inventory for Primary Education Children" developed by Serin, Bulut Serin and Saygılı (2010), the "Attitude Scale towards the Science Course" created Kenar and Balcı (2012), and Torrance Creative Figural A booklet, one of the Thought Tests, was used. Within the scope of the study, it has revealed that its applications differentiated according to the Grid Model have a significant effect on the creative thinking and problem solving skills and attitudes of gifted students.
Downloads
References
Akkanat, Ç. (2012). İlköğretim 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin bilimsel yaratıcılık düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Unpublished master’s thesis, Gaziosmanpaşa Üniversitesi, Tokat.
Akkaş, E. (2014). Farklılaştırılmış problem çözme öğretiminin üstün zekâlı ve yetenekli öğrencilerin matematik problemlerini çözmelerine, tutumlarına ve yaratıcı düşünmelerine etkileri. Unpublished doctorate dissertation. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Bolu.
Altun, M., & Arslan, Ç. (2006). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin problem çözme stratejilerini öğrenmeleri üzerine bir çalışma, Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19 (1), Bursa.
Anderson, K. M. (2007). Differentiating instruction to include all students. Preventing School Failure, 51(3), 49-53.
Aslan, A.E. (2001). Torrance Yaratıcı Düşünce Testi’nin Türkçe Versiyonu. Marmara Üniversitesi Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 14, 19-40.
Ashman A.F, & Conway, R. F. (1997), An introduction to cognitive education. Theory and applications. New York, NY: Routledge.
Beler, Y. (2010). Farklılaştırılmış öğretim ortamının sınıf yönetimine ve öğrencilerin akademik başarılarına etkisi .Unpublished master’s thesis. Maltepe Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
Beecher, M. & Sweeny, S. M. (2008). Closing the achievement gap with curriculum enrichment and differerentiation: one school’s story. Journal of Advanced Academics, 19 (3), 502-530
Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2018). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
Biological Science Curriculum Study (2006). Why Does Inquiry Matter? Because That’s What Science Is All About! Kendall/Hunt Publıshıng Company, ABD.
Callahan, C. M. (2017). The characteristics of gifted and talented students. In Fundamentals of Gifted Education. London: Routledge.
Candar, H. (2009). Fen eğitiminde yaratıcı düşünme öğretim tekniklerinin öğrencilerin akademik başarı, tutum ve motivasyonlarına etkisi. Unpublished master’s thesis, Marmara Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
Chen, Y.H. (2007). Exploring the assessment aspect of differentiated instruction: college EFL earners’ perspectives on tiered performance tasks. Unpublished doctorate dissertation, The University of New Orleans.
Cooper, C. R., Baum, S. M., & Neu, T. W. (2004). Developing scientific talent in students with special needs. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15(4), 162-169.
Coulter, S.E. & Groenke, S. L. (2008). A differentiated vocabulary unit for john knowles’a seperate peace. English Journal, 97 (4), 26-32
Cross, T. L., Coleman, L.J. & Stewart, R.A. (1993). Psychosocial diversity among gifted adolescents: An exploratory of two groups. Roeper Review, 17, 181-185.
Çalıkoğlu, B. S. (2014). Üstün zekalı ve yetenekli öğrencilerde derinlik ve karmaşıklığa göre farklılaştırılmış fen öğretiminin başarı bilimsel süreç becerileri ve tutuma etkisi Unpublished doctorate dissertation. İstanbul Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
Demir, S. ve Gürol, M. (2015). Farklılaştırılmış öğretim yöntemlerinin derin ve yüzeysel öğrenen öğrencilerin kalıcılık puanları üzerindeki etkisi. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 5(2), 187-206.
Demirci, C. (2007). Fen bilgisi öğretiminde yaratıcılığın erişi ve tutuma etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32, 65-75.
Dreeszen, J. L. (2009). The impact of differentiation on the critical thinking of gifted readers and the evolving perspective of the fifth grade classroom teacher. Unpublished doctorate dissertation, College of Education Kansas State Universiy.
Ersoy, E. ve Başer, N. 2009). İlköğretim 6. sınıf öğrencilerinin yaratıcı düşünme düzeyleri, Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(9), 128-137.
Fahey, J. (2000). Who wants to differentiate instruction? We did. Educational Leadership, 58, 70-72.
Geisler, J. L., Hessler, T., Gardner, R., & Lovelace, T. S. (2009). Differentiated writing interventions for high-achieving urban african American elementary students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20, 214–247.
Gould, J. C., Weeks, V., & Evans, S. (2005). Science starts early: A program for developing talent in science. S. K. Johnsen & J. Kendrick (Ed.), Science education for gifted students. Texas: Prufrock Press.
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B. ve Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, Prentice-Hall, NJ, USA
Johnson, D. T., Boyce, L. N. ve VanTassel-Baska, J. (2013). Science curriculum review: Evaluating materials for high-ability learners. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39(1), 36-42.
Kaplan, S. N. (2009). The grid: A model to construct differentiated curriculum for the gifted. J. S. Renzulli, E. J. Gubbins, K. S. McMillen, R. D. Eckert vev C. A. Little (Ed.), Systems and Models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (235-251). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Karnes, F. A., & Riley, T. L. (2005). Developing an early passion for science through competitions. S. K. Johnsen & J. Kendrick (Ed.), Science education for gifted students. Texas: Prufrock Press.
Kapusnick, R.A. & Hauslein, C.M. (2001). The silver cup of differentiated instruction. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 37 (4), 156-159
Kenar,İ. & Balcı,M. (2012). Fen ve teknoloji dersine yönelik tutum ölçeği geliştirme: ilköğretim 4 ve 5.sınıf örneği. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Sayı 34 – 201-210
Keskin Ö.M., Samancı Keskin, N., Aydın, S. (2013). Bilim ve sanat merkezleri: Mevcut durumları, sorunları ve çözüm önerileri. Üstün Yetenekliler Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi 1(2), üstün Sayı, 78-96.
MEB Yönergesi, (2015). Bilim Ve Sanat Merkezleri Yönergesi. Özel Eğitim Rehberlik Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü. Ankara
MEB Yönergesi, (2016). Bilim Ve Sanat Merkezleri Yönergesi. Özel Eğitim Rehberlik Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü. Ankara
McAdamis, S. (2001). Teachers tailor their instruction to meet a variety of student needs. Journal of Staff Development, 22 (2), 1-5
Meador, K. S. (2003). Thinking creatively about science: Suggestions for primary teachers. Gifted Child Today, 26(1), 25-29.
Özerbaş, M. A. (2011) Yaratıcı Düşünme Öğrenme Ortamının Akademik Başarı ve Bilgilerin Kalıcılığa Etkisi. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi,31,(3) 675-705
Özdemir, M. (2004). Fen eğitiminde bilimsel süreç becerilerine dayalı laboratuvar yön- teminin akademik başarı, tutum ve kalıcılığa etkisi. Unpublished master’s thesis, Zonguldak Karaelmas Üniversitesi. Zonguldak.
Reis, S. M. & Housand, A. M. (2008). Characteristics of gifted and talented learners: Similarities and differences across domains. In F. A. Karnes & K. R. Stephens (Ed.), Achieving excellence: Educating the gifted and talented. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merril/ Prentice Hall.
Renzulli, J. S., Smith, L. H., White, A. J., Callahan, C. M., Hartman, R. K., & Westberg, K. L. (2002). Scales for rating the behavioral characteristics of superior students. Technical and administration manual. Creative Learning Press, Inc., Mansfield, CT.
Robinson, A., Shore, B.M., & Enersen, D.L. (2007). Best practices in gifted education: An evidence-based guide. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Sak, U. (2010). Üstün zekâlılar özellikleri tanılanmaları eğitimleri. Ankara: Maya Akademi.
Samms, P. (2009). When Teachers Differantiate Reading Instruction For Fifth Grade Students: Impacts On Academic Achievement, Social And Personal Development, Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Argosy University.
Serin, O., Bulut Serin, N., & Saygılı, G. (2010). İlköğretim düzeyindeki çocuklar için problem çözme envanteri’nin (ÇPÇE) geliştirilmesi. İlköğretim Online, 9(2), 446- 458.
Smutny,J.F.(2003).Differentated instruction. Phi Delta Kappa Fastbacks, 506,7-47.
Stake, E. J., & Mares, K. R. (2001). Science enrichment programs for gifted high school girls and boys: Predictors of program impact on science confidence and motivation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38 (10), 1065-1088.
Sumida M. (2017) Science Education for Gifted Learners. In: Taber K.S., Akpan B. (eds) Science Education. New Directions in Mathematics and Science Education. Rotterdam: SensePublishers.
Tieso, C. (2005). The effects of grouping practices and curricular adjustments on achievement. ournal fort he Education of the Gifted, 29, 60-89
Trna, J. & Trnova, E. (2015). Experiments in the Development of Gifted Students in Science. In A. Krajna, L. Ryk, K. Sujak-Lesz (Eds.). Problemy dydaktyki fizyki. Wroclaw: Centrum Edukacji Nauczycielskiej Uniwersytetu Wroclawskiego.
Torrance, E.P. (1996). Torrance tests of creative thinking : Norms technical manual. Personnel Press Inc.: LM.
Torrance, E. P. (2008). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking Norms-Technical Manual Figural (Streamlined) Forms A and B.Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2000). Reconcilable differences?Stardards-based teaching and differentiation. Educational Leadership, 58(1), 6-11.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom. Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Tomlinson, C.A.& McTighe,J.(2006). Integrating differentiated ınstruction and understanding by design. ABD: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Üşenti, Ü. A. (2013). Farklılaştırılmış Türkçe öğretim uygulamalarının üstün zekalı ve yetenekli öğrencilerdeki bilişsel beceri ve başarı durumlarına etkisi. International Journal of Social Science Research, 2(2).
VanTassel-Baska, J. (2002). Theory and research on curriculum development for gifted. K. A. Heller, F. J. Mönks, R.J. Sternberg ve R. F. Subotnik (Ed.), International hand- book of giftedness and talent. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.
VanTassel-Baska, J., & Stambaugh, T. (2006). Comprehensive curriculum for gifted learners. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Verschaffel, L., De Corte, E., Lasure, S.,Van Vaerenbergh, G., Bogaerts, H.& Ratinckx, E. (1999). Learning to Solve Mathematical Application Problems: A Design Experiment with Fifth Graders”, Mathematical Thinking & Learning. 1(1), 195-229
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
