Examination of Science and Art Center Course Materials According to Maker Differentiation Principles

Year 2024, , 100 - 110, 30.06.2024

Hamza Kaynar , Ahmet Kurnaz , Canan Şentürk Barışık

https://doi.org/10.51535/tell.1436508

Abstract

The main factor in the emergence of this research is that the current educational materials prepared for gifted students are not based on a theoretical basis, curriculum differentiation and models are not taken into consideration in the preparation of activities for gifted students, gifted education principles are not reflected in the curricula, and applications related to gifted students are not monitored and evaluated. This study aims to examine the activities included in the supplementary course materials prepared for Science and Technology in Science and Art Centers according to the Maker-Banks Differentiated Instruction Assessment Model. In line with the research objective, a total of 31 activities in the field of science and technology were examined for students included in the support education program prepared in 2022 by the Directorate General of Special Education and Guidance Services. The "Instruction Program Evaluation Form According to the Maker-Banks Model" was used as the data collection tool. It was concluded that the activities included in the supplementary course materials prepared for Science and Technology in Science and Art Centers do not meet the content and process conditions according to the Maker-Banks Differentiated Instruction Assessment Model. It was found that the activities met the conditions of economy, reasoning, teaching pace, openness, exploratory learning, higher-order thinking, real-life problems, and product evaluation. When new activities and materials are prepared for gifted students, the criteria that were weak in the Maker-Banks Model in this study can be strengthened. The qualities of the prepared activities can be evaluated according to the criteria in the Maker-Banks Model. It is believed that this study will pave the way for new studies by evaluating activities prepared for areas other than science and technology and for different grade levels according to the criteria in the Maker-Banks Model.

Keywords

Gifted, Differantiation, Maker Model, Science and Art Center

Ethical Statement

Dear Editor, According to section 40/8 of the Graduate Education and Training Regulation of Necmettin Erbakan University, ethical committee approval is not mandatory for document analysis and similar studies.

References

• Ataman, A. (1998). Üstün zekâlılar ve üstün yetenekliler. In S. Eripek (Ed.), Anadolu University Publications
• Avcı, E. (2015). Dijital sanat bağlamında dijital teknolojilerin güzel sanatlar eğitimine entegrasyonu: bir eylem araştırması Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eskişehir.
• Bowen, G. A. (2005). Local-level stakeholder collaboration: a substantive theory of community driven development. Journal of the Community Development Society, 36(2), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.10.1080/15575330509490176
• Bozkurt, A., Özmantar, M. F., & Özbey, N. (2019). Bilim ve sanat merkezleri matematik çerçeve programında yer verilen etkinliklerdeki yöntem ve tekniklerin incelenmesi. Congress Papers, 19
• Çaylak, B. (2009). Bilim ve sanat merkezlerinde uygulanan fen bilimleri etkinliklerinin incelenmesi. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, İnönü Üniversitesi, Malatya. Davis, G. A., Rimm, S. B., & Siegle, D. (2014). Education of the gifted and talented (6. baskı). Essex: Pearson.
• Elmas, O. (2020). Üstün yetenekliler eğitim programları müfredat modeli kullanılarak zenginleştirilen ve hızlandırılan 'madde ve doğası' konu alanı ile ilgili öğrenci görüşleri: Bursa püyed örneği. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Uludağ Üniversitesi, Bursa.
• Genç, M. A. (2014). Üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin görsel sanatlar eğitiminde disiplinlerarası öğretim etkinliklerinin değerlendirilmesi (Konya BİLSEM örneği). SED-Sanat Eğitimi Dergisi, 2(1), 142-168. https://doi.org/10.7816/sed-02-01-08
• Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4. edt). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
• İnan, E. (2023). Maker modeli ile hazırlanan farklılaştırılmış geometri etkinlikleri ve özel yetenekli öğrenciler. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Balıkesir University, Balıkesir. Karasar, N. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi (17th ed.). Ankara: Nobel Publishing.
• Kozak, M. (2017). Bilimsel araştırma: Tasarım, yazım ve yayım teknikleri. Ankara: Detay Publishing.
• Kurnaz, A. (2014). Evaluation of science and art centers based on reports and manager opinions in the twentieth year. Journal of Gifted Education Research, 2(1).
• Kutlu-Abu, N. (2018). Üstün yeteneklilerin kaynaştırılmasına yönelik farklılaştırılmış fen etkinliklerinin değerlendirilmesi. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Amasya Üniversitesi, Amasya.
• Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2006). Study of mathematically precocious youth after 35 years: Uncovering antecedents for the development of math-science expertise. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(4), 316-345. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00019.x
• Maker, C. J. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
• Merriam, S. B. (2015). Qualitative research: designing, implementing, and publishing a study. In Handbook of Research on Scholarly Publishing and Research Methods (ss. 125-140). IGI Global.
• Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB). (2019). Özel eğitim ve rehberlik hizmetleri genel müdürlüğü, bilim ve sanat merkezler. Öğrenci Tanılama ve Yerleştirme Kılavuzu. http://orgm.meb.gov.tr/www/bilim-ve-sanatmerkezleri-ogrenci-tanilama-ve-yerlestirme-kilavuzu-yayimlandi/icerik/1231
• Mogalakwe, M. (2006). The use of documentary research methods in social research. African Sociological Review/Revue Africaine De Sociologie, 10(1), 221-230.
• O’Leary, Z. (2017). The essential guide to doing your research project. SAGE Publications Ltd., London.
• Özbay, Y. (2013). Üstün yetenekli çocuklar ve aileleri. Ankara: T.C. Aile ve Sosyal Politikalar Bakanlığı Aile ve Toplum Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü Yayını. Sak, U. (2013). Education programs for talented students model (EPTS) and its effectiveness on gifted students’ mathematical creativity. Education and Science, 38, 51-61.
• Seyidoğlu, H. (2016). Bilimsel araştırma ve yazma el kitabı. Istanbul: Güzem Can Publishing.
• Tomlinson, C., Brimijoin, K., & Narvaez, L. (2008). The differentiated school: Making revolutionary changes in teaching and learning. ASCD.
• Tomlinson, C. A., & Allan, S. D. (2000). Leadership for differentiating schools and classrooms. ASCD.
• Tomlinson C. A., & Jarvıs, J. M. (2000). Differentiation: Making curriculum work for all students through responsive planning and instruction. In J. S. Renzulli, E. Heacox, & D. Jarosewich (Eds.), Differentiating Instruction in the Regular Classroom. Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishing.
• Van Tassel-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
• Walker, B., Hafenstein, N. L., & Crow-Enslow, L. (1999). Meeting the needs of gifted learners in the early childhood classroom. Young Children, 54(1), 32-36.
• Willey, G. R., & Phillips, P. (2001). Method and theory in American archaeology. University of Alabama Press.
• Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (9th ed.). Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.