GIFTED CHILDREN AND OUTDOOR EDUCATION: HOW A SHORT-TERM OUTDOOR EDUCATION INFLUENCED THE KNOWLEDGE AND THE NATURE PERCEPTION OF GIFTED STUDENTS

Yıl 2022, , 47 - 65, 30.04.2022

Eray Demirçelik , Evrim Karaçetin , Filiz Dadaser-celik

https://doi.org/10.55605/ejedus.972349

Öz

Outdoor education has many beneficial effects on children’s learning and cognitive abilities and their connectedness to nature. This study aims to evaluate the impact of short-term outdoor education on the nature perception and knowledge of gifted students. Thirty gifted students were enrolled in a 7-day outdoor education activity. The camp included science, art, and social activities organized based on specific features of Mt. Erciyes. Three different methods were used for assessment of outcomes. The knowledge test was applied to measure students’ newly acquired knowledge. Cognitive mapping was used to assess changes in students’ perceptions. Finally, the drawings and stories of students were evaluated to understand how students incorporated knowledge into their daily experiences and especially into their art. Our results show that outdoor education provided many benefits to the gifted students. They developed positive relationships with their environment, gained knowledge and their perceptions of the Mt. Erciyes ecosystem has changed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Short-term outdoor education, gifted students, nature perception, cognitive mapping

Destekleyen Kurum

Turkish Scientific and Technical Research Council (TUBITAK)

Proje Numarası

118B437

Teşekkür

This work was supported by Turkish Scientific and Technical Research Council (TUBITAK) under grant number 118B437. We would like to thank Jethro Bell for proofreading for English and Mehmet Soylu for his help with digitizing and organizing data from cognitive maps. Finally, we would like to thank the students and instructors participated in the education program, without their contributions this study could not have been possible.

Özel Yetenekli Çocuklar ve Açık Hava Eğitimi: Kısa Süreli Açık Hava Eğitiminin Özel Yetenekli Öğrencilerin (Doğa) Algılamalarına Etkisi

Öz

Bu makale Türkiye’deki özel yetenekli öğrencilerle yapılan disiplinlerarası bir doğa eğitimi etkinliğinin araştırma bulgularını sunmaktadır. Araştırmanın teorik çerçevesini açık hava etkinliklerinin özel yetenekli öğrenciler üzerindeki bilişsel ve sosyal etkisi oluşturmaktadır. Çalışmaya Türkiye’nin 15 ilinden 12-14 yaş arası 30 özel yetenekli öğrenci katılmıştır. Erciyes Dağında yedi gün konaklamalı olarak yapılan çalışmada açık havada deneysel öğrenme fırsatları sunan bilim, sanat ve sosyal aktiviteler içeren disiplinlerarası 28 farklı etkinlik yapılmıştır. Çalışmada nicel ve nitel yöntemlerin birlikte kullanıldığı karma yöntem tercih edilmiştir. Çalışma verilerinin toplanmasında, öğrenci görüşmeleri, bilişsel haritalama, ön test ve son test, resim çizme ve hikaye yazma gibi farklı teknikler kullanılmıştır. Veri analizinde, deneysel yöntem ve içerik analizinden yararlanılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda, özel yetenekli öğrencilerin etkinliklerde öğrendikleri yeni kavram ve fikirleri çizimlerinde, hikâyelerinde başarıyla kullandıkları ve uygulamaya yönelik çevre bilgilerinde artış olduğu görülmüştür. Öğrenciler yapılan etkinliklerden keyif aldıklarını, açık hava uygulamalarının, araştırma ve öğrenme isteklerini artırdığını, kendilerini rahat ve sakin hissetmelerinde yardımcı olduğunu, yeni arkadaşlar edindiklerini, kolay öğrenebildiklerini ve eğitime katılmaktan mutlu olduklarını söylemişlerdir. Araştırma bulgularına göre, açık hava etkinliklerinin öğrenciler üzerindeki bilişsel ve sosyal olumlu etkileri düşünüldüğünde özel yetenekli öğrenci eğitimlerinde daha fazla açık hava etkinliğine yer verilmesi önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kısa süreli açık hava eğitimi, Özel Yetenekli Çocuklar, Doğa Algısı, Bilişsel Haritalama

Proje Numarası

118B437

Kaynakça

• Bauer, V. (1975). Simulation, evaluation and conflict analysis in urban planning, m. m. baldwin, portraits of complexity: Applications of systems methodologies to societal problems. Columbus, OH, USA: Batelle Institute, 179-92.
• Braund, M. & Reiss, M. (2006). Towards a more authentic science curriculum: The contribution of out-of-school learning. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1373-1388.
• Borders, C., Woodley, S., & Moore, E. (2014). Inclusion and giftedness, Gifted Education: Current Perspectives and Issues (Advances in Special Education), Vol. 26: 127-146.
• Carrier, S. J. (2009). The effects of outdoor science lessons with elementary school students on preservice teachers’self-efficacy. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 35-48.
• Cherney, I. D., Seiwert, C., Dickey, T. M., & Flichtbeil, J. D. (2006). Children’s drawings: A mirror to their minds. Educational Psychology, 26, 127-142.
• Clark, B. (2002). Growing up gifted. Developing the potential of children at home and at school. (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. New York: Taylor and Francis
• Cronin-Jones, L. (2000). The effectiveness of schoolyards as sites for elementary science instruction. School Science and Mathematics 100(4), 203-212.
• Dillon J., Rickinson, M., Teamey, K., Morris, M., Choi, M. Y., Sanders, D. & Benefield, P. (2006). The value of outdoor learning: evidence from research in the UK and elsewhere. School Science Review, 87(320), 107-111.
• Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011), The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82, 405-432
• Dowdell, K., Gray, T., & Malone, K. (2011). Nature and its influence on Children’s outdoor play. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 15(2), 24–35.
• Eden, C., Ackerman, F., & Cropper, S. (1992). The analysis of cause maps, Journal of Management Studies, 29, 309-23.
• Ee, J., & Ong, C. W. (2014) Which social emotional competencies are enhanced at a social emotional learning camp? Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 14(1), 24-41, http://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2012.761945
• Eken G., Bozdoğan, M., İsfendiyaroğulları, S., Kılıç, T. D., & Lise, Y. (Editors). (2006). Turkey's Key Biodiversity Areas . Nature Association. Ankara
• Fish, L. A., & Bailie, P. E. (2018). Getting gifted kids outdoors: Tips for a summer of play. National Association for Gifted Children, 5-9. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw-Hill.
• Galton, F. (1892). Hereditary genius (2nd ed.). London: Macmillan.
• Gray, T., & Birrell, C. (2015). Touched by the earth: A place-based outdoorlearning programme incorporating the arts. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 15(4), 330–349.
• Hage, P., & Harary, F. (1983). Structural models in anthropology. New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press.
• Harary, F., Norman, R. Z., & Cartwright, D. (1965). Structural Models: An introduction to the theory of directed graphs. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
• Harvey, M. R. 1989. Children’s experiences with vegegation. Children’s Environment Quarterly 6 (1), 36-43.
• Hay D. B. (2007). Using concept maps to measure deep, surface and non-learning outcomes, Studies in Higher Education, 32 (1), 39-57.
• Ismail, M. N., Ngah, N. A., Umar, I. N. (2010). The effects of mind mapping with cooperative learning on programming performance, problem solving skill and metacognitive knowledge among computer science students, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42 (1), 35-61.
• Jones, M., Van Kessel, G., Swisher, L., Beckstead, J. & Edwards, I. (2014). Cognitive maps and the structure of observed learning outcome assessment of physiotherapy students’ ethical reasoning knowledge, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 1-20.
• Kaufman, S. B., & Sternberg, R. J. (2008). Conceptions of giftedness. In S. I. Pfeiffer (Ed.), Handbook of giftedness in children: Psychoeducational theory, research and best practices (pp. 71-91). New York: Springer.
• Lakin, L. (2006). Science beyond the classroom. Journal of Biological Education, 40(2), 88-90.
• Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A Quantitative approach to content validity, Personnel Psychology, 28, 563-575.
• Laszlo, E., Artigiani, R., Combs, A., & Csanyi, V. (1996). Changing Visions, Human Cognitive Maps, Past, Present, and Future. Westport, CT, USA: Praeger.
• Maker, C., & Nielson, A. (1996). Curriculum development and teaching strategies for gifted learners. Austin: TX: Pro-Ed.
• MacDonald, N. (1983). Trees and networks in biological models. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
• Maller, C., & Townsend, M. (2006) Children's mental health and wellbeing and hands-on contact with nature. International Journal of Learning, 12(4), 359-372.
• Manzanal R. F., Barreiro, L. M. R., & Jimenez, M. C. (1999). Relationship between ecology fieldwork and student attitudes toward environmental protection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 431-453.
• MEB (Turkey Ministry of Education). (2016). Directive on science and art centers. Retrieved from, http://orgm.meb.gov.tr
• Miles, M, B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded Sourcebook. (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
• Mills, C. (2003). Characteristics of Effective Teachers of Gifted Students: Teacher Background and Personality Styles of Students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(4):272-281.
• Morgan, G. (1980). Paradigms, metaphors, and puzzle solving in organization theory, Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(4), 605-622.
• Özesmi, U., & Özesmi, S. (2004). Ecological models based on people's knowledge: A multi-step fuzzy cognitive mapping approach, Ecological Modelling, 176, 43-64.
• Özdemir, O. (2010). The effects of nature-based environmental education on environmental perception and behavior of primary school students. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 27, 125-138.
• Payne, M. R. (1985). Using the outdoors to teach science: a resourge guide for elementary and middle school teachers. National institute of education (ED): Wasington, DC.
• Pfouts, B. R., & Schultz, R. A. (2003). The benefits of outdoor learning centers for young gifted learners. Gifted Child Today, 26(1), 56-63
• Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1994). Research related to the Schoolwide Enrichment Triad model. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38(1), 7-20. Shanely, S. D. (2006). Towards an understanding of an outdoor education program: Listening to participants’ stories. PhD Thesis, University of Florida, USA.
• Simon, H.A. (1996). The Sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, UK: The MIT Press. Van Tassel-Baska, J. (2005). Acceleration Strategies for Teaching Gifted Learners. Waco, TX Prufrock Press Inc.
• Taber, K. S. (2007). Science education for gifted learners? In K. S. Taber (Ed.), Science Education for Gifted Learners (pp. 1-14). London: Routledge.Taylor et al., 1998
• Thomas, G. (2010). Facilitator, teacher, or leader? Managing conflicting roles in outdoor education. Journal of Experiential Education, 32(3), 239–254.
• Tsai, J. T. (2006). The identification of the components for an outdoor education curriculum in Taiwan. PhD Thesis, Indiana University, USA.
• Yildirim, A., & Simsek, H. (2011). Qualitative research methods in social sciences (8th ed.). Ankara: Seckin
• Zylstra, M J., Knight, A. T., Esler, K. J. & Le Grande, L. L. L. (2014). Connectedness as a core conservation concern: An Interdiciplinary Review of Theory and a call for Practice. Springer Science Reviews, 2, 119-143.