Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Problem Çözmeye Yönelik Yansıtıcı Düşünme Becerilerinin İncelenmesi: Gümüşhane Örneği

Year 2017, Volume: 12 Issue: 23, 415 - 435, 28.06.2017

Abdullah Kaplan , Muhammet Doruk , Mesut Öztürk

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin problem çözmeye yönelik yansıtıcı düşünme becerilerini incelemektir. Çalışmada karma araştırma yaklaşımı benimsenmiştir. Çalışmanın nicel kısmındaki katılımcılar 2013-2014 Eğitim öğretim yılı güz döneminde Gümüşhane ilinde öğrenimine devam eden 31 üstün yetenekli öğrenciden oluşmaktadır. Çalışmanın nitel kısmı ise bu öğrenciler arasından problem çözmeye yönelik yansıtıcı düşünme becerilerine göre seçilen altı üstün yetenekli öğrenci ile yürütülmüştür. Çalışma sonucunda, çalışmaya katılan üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin problem çözmeye yönelik yansıtıcı düşünme becerilerinin “çoğu zaman” düzeyinde olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca öğrencilerin problem çözme süreçlerinde nedenleme ve değerlendirme becerilerini yoğun bir şekilde kullanmalarına karşın sorgulama becerilerini daha az kullandıkları tespit edilmiştir.

Keywords

Matematik eğitimi, problem çözme, üstün yetenekli öğrenciler, yansıtıcı düşünme

References

• Adams, R., Turns, J. & Atman, C. (2003). Educating effective engineering designers: The role of reflective practice. Design Studies, 24(3), 275-294.
• Altun, M. (2008). İlköğretim ikinci kademede (6, 7 ve 8. sınıflarda) matematik öğretimi (5. Baskı). Bursa: Aktüel Alfa Akademi.
• Badger, J. (2010). Assessing reflective thinking: pre-service teachers' and professors' perceptions of an oral examination. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(1), 77-89.
• Baki, A. (2006). Kuramdan uygulamaya matematik eğitimi. Trabzon: Derya Kitabevi.
• Başol, G. ve Gencel, İ. (2013). Reflective thinking scale: a validity and reliability study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13(2), 941-946.
• Buzdar, M. & Akhtar, A. (2013). Development of Reflective Thinking through Distance Teacher Education Programs at AIOU Pakistan. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(3), 43-58.
• Can, B. T. & Yıldırım, C. (2014). The instrument for determining the levels of reflective thinking among elementary school students. Educational Research and Reviews, 9(1), 9-16.
• Cavanagh, M. & Garvey, T. (2012). A professional experience learning community for pre-service secondary mathematics teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(12), 57-75.
• Chapman, O. (2005). Constructıng pedagogıcal knowledge of problem solvıng: Preservıce mathematıcs teachers. International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, (29), 225-232.
• Chen, C. (2014). Nurturing students’ problem-solving skills and engagement in computer-mediated communications (CMC). Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 25(3), 309-325.
• Choy, S. & Oo, P. (2014). Reflectıve thinking and teaching practices: a precursor for incorporating critical thinking into the classroom? International Journal of Instruction, 5(1), 167-182.
• Curebal, F. (2004). Gifted students’ attitudes towards science and classroom environment based on gender and grade level. (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
• Davis, G. A. (2006). Gifted children and gifted education: A handbook for teachers and parents. Scottsdale: Great Potential Pr Inc.
• Demiralp, D. & Kazu, H. (2012). İlköğretim birinci kademe programlarının öğrencilerin yansıtıcı düşünmelerini geliştirmedeki katkısına yönelik öğretmen görüşleri. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 2(2), 29-38.
• Department for Education [DfE]. (2014). National curriculum in england. mathematics programmes of study. Online: www.gov.uk/
• Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston: Heath. archive.org adresinden alındı
• Douglas, E., Ljungberg, M., McNeill, N., Malcolm, Z.T. & Therriault, D.J. (2012). Moving beyond formulas and fixations: solving open-ended engineering problems. European Journal of Engineering Education, 37(6), 627-651.
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E. & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (Eight Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill
• Gagné, F. (2003). Transforming gifts into talents: The DMGT as a developmental theory. N. Colanelo & G. A. Davis içinde, Handbook of Gifted Education (s. 66-74). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
• Gagné, F. (2008). Building gifts into talents: Overview of the DMGT. 10th Asia Pacific Conference for Giftedness. Singapore.
• Gagné, F. (2011). Academic talent development and the equity issue in gifted education. Talent Development & Excellence, 3(1), 3-22.
• Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds. New York: Basic Books.
• Gökkurt, B. & Soylu, Y. (2013). Öğrencilerin problem çözme sürecinde anlam bilgisini kullanma düzeyleri. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 21(2), 469-488.
• Guberman, R. & Leikin, R. (2013). Interesting and difficult mathematical problems: changing teachers’ views by employing multiple-solution tasks. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 16(1), 33-56.
• Gülen, Ö. Ç. (2014). Veri madenciliği teknikleri ile üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin ilgi alanlarının analizi. (Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.
• Hoffman, B. & Spatariu, A. (2011). Metacognitive prompts and mental multiplication: Analyzing strategies with a qualitative lens. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 22(4), 607-635.
• Hong, Y. & Choi, I. (2011). Three dimensions of reflective thinking in solving design problems: A conceptual model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(5), 687-710.
• Jansen, A. & Spitzer, S. M. (2009). Prospective middle school mathematics teachers' reflective thinking skills: Descriptions of their students' thinking and interpretations of their teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 12(2), 133-151.
• Josten, M. L. (2011). Reflective thinking: a tool for professional development in educational practice. Walden: Walden University.
• Kızılkaya, G. & Aşkar, P. (2009). The development of a reflective thinking skill scale towards problem solving. Education and Science, 34(154), 82-92.
• Kwon, K. & Jonassen, D. H. (2011). The influence of reflective self-explanations on problem-solving performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(3), 247-263.
• Lee, H. (2005). Understanding and assessing preservice teachers’ reflective thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(6), 699-715.
• LeMahleu, B. (1980). Synthesis of research on the gifted. Educational Leadership, (December), 261-265.
• Mansvelder-Longayroux, D., Beijaard, D. & Verloop, N. (2007). The portfolio as a tool for stimulating reflection by student teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(1), 47-62.
• Maykut, P. & Morehouse, R. (1994). Begining qualitative research a philosophic and practical guide. London: The Falmer Press.
• McGuire, L., Lay, K. & Peters, J. (2009). Pedagogy of reflective writing in professional education. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(1), 93-107.
• McMillan, J. H. (2000). Educational research fundamentals for the consumer (3. edition). New York: Longman.
• McMillan, J. W. & Schumacher, S. (2014). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (Seventh Edition). Boston: Pearson.
• Mertol, H. (2014). ABD ve Türkiye’de üstün zekalı çocuklara sosyal bilgiler dersi veren öğretmenlerin görüş ve uygulamaları (Hope projesi ve bilsem örneği). (Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi). Atatürk Üniversitesi, Erzurum.
• Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. National Center for Research in Mathematical Science Education and Freudenthal Institute. (1998). "Comparing Quantities" middle-grades unit in mathematics in context. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica Educational Corporation. Pativisan, S. (2006). Mathematical problem solving processes of Thai gifted students. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi. Oregon State university.
• Polya, G. (1985). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method (Second edition). United States of America: Princeton University Press.
• Renzulli, J. S. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
• Rieger, A., Radcliffe, B. & Doepker, G. M. (2013). Practices for developing reflective thinking skills among teachers. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 49(4), 184-189.
• Schaaf, M. V., Baartman, L., Prins, F., Oosterbaan, A. & Schaap, H. (2013). Feedback dialogues that stimulate students’ reflective thinking. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57(3), 227-245.
• Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. D. Grouws içinde, Hanbook for Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (s. 334-370). New York: Macmillan.
• Sen, H. S. (2013). Reflective thinking skills of primary school students based on problem solving ability. International Journal of Academic Research Part B, 5(5), 41-48.
• Siegler, R. S. & Kotovsky, K. (1986). Two levels of giftedness: Shall ever the twain meet? R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson içinde, Conceptions of Giftedness (s. 417-435). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Song, H.D., Grabowski, B.L., Koszalka, T.A. & Harkness, W. L. (2006). Patterns of instructional-design factors prompting reflective thinking in middle-school and college level problem-based learning environments. Instructional Science: An International Journal of Learning and Cognition, 34(1), 63-87.
• Stake, R. E. (2003). Case Studie. N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Ed.) içinde, Handbook of qualitative research (s. 134-164). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Sternberg, R. J. (2000). Wisdom as a form of giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, (44), 252-260.
• Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Giftedness according to the theory of successful intelligence. N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis içinde, Handbook of gifted education (s. 88-99). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
• Tannenbaum, A. J. (2003). Nature and nurture of giftedness. N. Colangelo ve G. A. Davis içinde, Handbook of gifted education (s. 45-59). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
• Terman, L. (1925). Genetic studies of genius: Vol. 1 mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted children. California: Stanford University Press.
• The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
• TC Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB]. (2013). Ortaokul matematik dersi (5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar) öğretim programı. Ankara: T.C. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.
• Türnüklü, E. B. & Yeşildere, S. (2005). Problem, problem çözme ve eleştirel düşünme. GÜ, Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(3), 107-123
• Wade, S., Fauske, J. & Thompson, A. (2008). Prospective teachers’ problem solving in online peer-led dialogues. American Educational Research Journal, 45(2), 398-442.
• Yates, J. (2011). Complex problem solving in radiologic technology: Understanding the roles of experience, reflective judgment, and workplace culture. Columbia: Columbia University.
• Yildiz, A., Baltaci, S. & Güven, B. (2011). Metacognitive behaviours of the eight grade gifted students in problem solving process. The New Educational Review, 26(4), 248-260.