Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review

Bestami Buğra ÜLGER, (Hakkari Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi, Hakkari, TÜRKİYE)
Salih ÇEPNİ (Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi, Bursa, TÜRKİYE)
Journal of Turkish Science Education
52 6
Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 17 Sayı: 3 Sayfa Aralığı: 443 - 466 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.36681/tused.2020.38 İndeks Tarihi: 28-06-2021

Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review

Öz:
In recent years, researchers have been interested in science, technology, engineering and mathematics(STEM), and educational studies of scientific giftedness have increased. In this study, we thematicallyreviewed studies both scientific giftedness and STEM education contexts. We aimed to shed light on theacademic outcomes of STEM and scientific giftedness studies. In total 72 articles were examined.Articles available in the literature were analyzed using a matrix that consisted of content features (aims,research methods, samples or participants, results and suggestions) and general features (type of journaland year) in thematic review. The findings are presented under the themes shown in the matrix. Ingeneral, the researchers focused on the following content features: STEM schools and programs, STEMcareer choices, STEM talent development, and scientifically gifted student characteristics. Within thiscontext, we discussed the results and implications for future research in the field of STEM education andimpacts on gifted students.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Abdurrahman, A., Nurulsari, N., Maulina, H., & Ariyani, F. (2019). Design and validation of inquiry-based STEM learning strategy as a powerful alternative solution to facilitate gift students facing 21st century challenging. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 7(1), 33-56.
  • Almarode, J. T., Subotnik, R. F., Crowe, E., Tai, R. H., Lee, G. M., & Nowlin, F. (2014). Specialized high schools and talent search programs: Incubators for adolescents with high ability in STEM disciplines. Journal of Advanced Academics, 25 (3), 307–331.
  • Andersen, L., & Ward, T. J. (2014). Expectancy-value models for the stem persistence plans of ninth-grade, high-ability students: A comparison between black, hispanic, and white students. Science Education, 98 (2), 216–242.
  • Andersen, L. (2014). Visual–Spatial ability: Important in STEM, ignored in gifted education, Roeper Review, 36 (2), 114-121.
  • Assouline, S. G., Colangelo, N., Heo, N., & Dockery, L. (2013). High-Ability students’ participation in specialized instructional delivery models: Variations by aptitude, grade, gender, and content area. Gifted Child Quarterly, 57 (2), 135–147.
  • Australian Association for the Education of the Gifted and Talented (1996). Future directions: A national position paper on the education of gifted and talented students. Sydney: AAEGT.
  • Australian Association for the Education of the Gifted and Talented (2006). Submission to the House Standing Committee on Education and Vocational Training, Submission on Teacher Training, Submission 172.
  • Aydeniz, M., Akgündüz, D., Çakmakçı, G., Çavaş, B., Çorlu, S., Öne,r T., & Özdemi,r S. (2015). STEM education Turkey report "Günün Modası Mı Yoksa Gereksinim Mi?” Istanbul Aydın University STEM Center and Education Faculty, Scala Pub.
  • Bariş, N., & Ecevit, T. (2019). STEM education for gifted student. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 13(1)., 217-233.
  • Bayer Corporation (2014). The Bayer Facts of Science Education XVI: US STEM Workforce Shortage—Myth or Reality? Fortune 1000 Talent Recruiters on the Debate. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 23, 617–623.
  • Bayer Corporation (2012). Bayer Facts of Science Education XV: A View from the Gatekeepers—STEM Department Chairs at America’s Top 200 Research Universities on Female and Underrepresented Minority Undergraduate STEM Students. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 21, 317–324
  • Betts, G. T., & Kercher, J. K. (1999). Autonomous learner model: Optimizing ability. Alps Publ.
  • Bellanca, J., & Brandt, R. (2010). 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
  • Bloom, B. (1985). Developing talent in young people. NewYork: Ballantine.
  • Bracken, B., VanTassel-Baska, J., Feng, A., & Brown, E. (2007). Project Athena: A tale of two studies. In J. VanTassel-Baska & T. Stambaugh (Eds.), Overlooked gems: A national perspective on low-income promising learners (63–67). Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children
  • Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C. & Koehler, C. M. (2012), What Is STEM? A Discussion About Conceptions of STEM in Education and Partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112, 3–11.
  • Brown, J. (2012). The current status of STEM education research, Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research 13 (5), 7-11.
  • Calik, M., Ayas, A., & Ebenezer, J. V. (2005). A review of solution chemistry studies: insights into students’ conceptions. J Sci Educ Technol 14 (1), 29–50
  • Cannady, M. A., Greenwald, E. & Harris, K. (2014). Problematizing the STEM Pipeline Metaphor: Is the STEM Pipeline Metaphor Serving Our Students and the STEM Workforce? Science Education, 98 (3), 443–460.
  • Carnevale, A. P. Smith, N.& Melton, M. (2011). STEM: Science Technology Engineering Mathematics. Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, Washington, DC, USA.
  • Christensen, R., Knezek, G., & Tyler-Wood, T. (2015). Alignment of hands-on STEM engagement activities with positive stem dispositions in secondary school students. Journal of Science Education and Technology. DOI:10.1007/s10956-015-9572-6
  • Coleman, A. (2016). The Authentic voice of gifted and talented black males regarding their motivation to engage in STEM. Illinois Association for Gifted Children Journal. 26- 39.
  • Collins, A. & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Cooper, C. R., Baum, S. M., & Neu, T. W. (2005). Science Education For Gifted. In K S Johnsen & J Kendrick (Eds.), Developing scientific talent in studies with special needs:An alterantive model for identification, curriculum and assessment. Prufrock Pres, Inc., USA.
  • Cotabish, A. (2016). STEM education for high-ability learners In B. MacFarlane (Ed.), Connecting the common core state, next generation science and gifted programming standards with stem curriculum for advanced learners, (163-171). TX: Prufrock Press.
  • Coxon, S. (2016). STEM education for high-ability learners In B. MacFarlane (Ed.), S is for science education at the secondary level, (17-32). TX: Prufrock Press.
  • Crabtree, L. M., Richardson, S. C., & Lewis, C. W. (2019). The gifted gap, STEM education, and economic immobility. Journal of Advanced Academics, 30(2), 203-231.
  • Dailey, D. (2016). STEM education for high-ability learners In B. MacFarlane (Ed.), S is for science education at the elementary level, (32-48). TX: Prufrock Press.
  • Dai, D. Y., Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Zhou, Y. (2015). Cope and grow: A grounded theory approach to early college entrants’ lived experiences and changes in a STEM program. Gifted Child Quarterly, 59(2), 75-90.
  • Ercan, F. (2013). Proposal for a model development in diagnosing of gifted students in the field of science (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from Turkish National Dissertation
  • Center (YÖK). (Dissertation Number: 336328)
  • Feldhusen, J. F., & Kolloff, M. B. (1986). Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), The Purdue three-stage model for gifted education at the elementary level. (126-153). CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Feldhusen, J. F. (1998). A conception of talent and talent development. In R. C. Friedman & K. B. Rogers (Eds.), Talent in context: Historical and social perspectives on giftedness (pp. 193–211). Washington, DC: APA.
  • Feldman, D. H. (2000). The development of creativity. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp.169–189). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Gagné, F. (2004) Transforming gifts into talents: the DMGT as a developmental theory, High Ability Studies, 15 (2), 119-147.
  • George, D. (1997). The challenge of the able child (2nd ed.). London: David Fulton. Goktas, Y., Hasancebi, F., Varisoglu, B., Akcay, A., Bayrak, N., Baran, M. & Sozbilir, M. (2012). Trends in educational research in Turkey: a content analysis. Educ Sci: Theory Pract 12 (1), 455–459.
  • Gotlieb, R., Hyde, E., Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Kaufman, S. B. (2016). Cultivating the social–emotional imagination in gifted education: insights from educational neuroscience. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1377(1), 22-31.
  • Gulbahar, Y., & Alper, A. (2009). A content analysis of the studies in instructional technologies area. Ankara Univ J Fac Educ Sci 42 (2), 93–111.
  • Heilbronner, N. N. (2011). Stepping onto the stem pathway: Factors affecting talented students’ declaration of stem majors in college. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34 (6), 876–899.
  • Heilbronner, N., N. (2013). The STEM pathway for women: What has changed? Gifted Child Quarterly. 57 (1), 39–55.
  • Hausamann, D. (2012) Extracurricular science labs for STEM talent support, Roeper Review, 34 (3), 170-182.
  • Hong, E. & Ditzler, C. (2013). Creatively gifted students are not like other gifted students: Research, theory, and practice. In K. H. Kim, J. C. Kaufman, J. Baer & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Incorporating Technology And Web Tools In Creativity Instruction, 17–38. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Hoyle, J. C. (2018). Black girls matter: An ethnographic investigation of rural AfricanAmerican girls experiencing a specialized STEM high school for gifted and talented students (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Alabama).
  • Ihrig, L. M., Lane, E., Mahatmya, D., & Assouline, S. G. (2018). STEM excellence and leadership program: Increasing the level of STEM challenge and engagement for highachieving students in economically disadvantaged rural communities. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 41(1), 24-42.
  • Johnsen, K. (2004). Definitions, models and characteristics. In S. K. Johnsen (Ed.) Identifying gifted students: A Practical guide (pp. 1-22). Waco, TX: Prufrock.
  • Jolly, J. L. (2009). The National defense education act, current stem initiative, and the gifted. Gifted Child Today, 32 (2), 50-53.
  • Jones, B M (2011). The Texas Academy of Mathematics and Science: A 20-year perspective. Journal for the Education of the Gifted. 34(3) 513-543.
  • Kanlı, E., & Özyaprak, M. (2015). STEM education for gifted and talented students in Turkey. Journal of Gifted Education Research (JGER), 3(2), 1-10.
  • Kang, J. W., & Nam, Y. (2017). The Impact of engineering design-based STEM research experience on gifted students' creative engineering problem solving propensity and attitudes toward engineering. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 37(4), 719-730.
  • Kangas, T. C., Cook, M., & Rule, A. C. (2017). Cinematherapy in gifted education identity development: Integrating the arts through STEM-themed movies. Journal of STEM Arts, Crafts, and Constructions, 2(2), 45-65.
  • Kaplan, S. (2009). Methods and materials for teaching the gifted. In F. Karnes & S. Bean (Eds.), Layering differentiated curricula for the gifted and talented. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
  • Karahan, E., & Ünal, A. (2019). Gifted students designing eco-friendly STEM projects. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 7(4), 1553-1570.
  • Karnes, F. A., & Riley, T. L. (2005). Science education for gifted. In Johnsen K S, Kendrick J (Eds). Developing an early passion for science through competitions. Prufrock Pres, Inc., USA.
  • Kaufman, S. B. & Sternberg, R. J. (2008). Handbook of giftedness in children In S. I. Pfeiffer (Ed.) Conceptions of Giftedness (71-92). NY: Springer.
  • Kell, H., J. & Lubinski, D. (2013). Spatial ability: A neglected talent in educational and occupational settings, Roeper Review, 35 (4), 219-230.
  • Kim, M. K., Roh, I. S., & Cho, M. K. (2016). Creativity of gifted students in an integrated math-science instruction. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 19, 38-48.
  • Kolloff, M. B., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1981). PACE (Program for Academic and Creative Enrichment): An application of the purdue three stage model. G/C/T, 18, 47-50.
  • Kurnaz, M. A., Çalik, M. (2009). A thematic review of ‘energy’ teaching studies: focuses, needs, methods, general knowledge claims and implications. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B: Soc Educ Stud 1(1), 1–26
  • Kurup, A. Chandra, A & Binoy, V. V. (2015). 'Little minds dreaming big science': are we really promoting 'children gifted in STEM' in India? Current Science,108, (5). 779- 781.
  • Labov, J. B., Reid, A. H., & Yamamoto, K. R. (2010). Integrated biology and undergraduate science education: a new biology education for the twenty-first century? CBE-Life Sciences Education, 9(1), 10-16.
  • Lee, M. H., Wu Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2009). Research trends in science education from 2003 to 2007: a content analysis of publications in selected journals. Int J Sci Educ 31(15), 1999–2020.
  • Mann, E. L., Mann, R. L., Strutz, M. L., Duncan, D. & Yoon, S. Y. (2011) Integrating engineering into K-6 curriculum: Developing talent in the STEM disciplines Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(4), 639–658.
  • Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 2-16.
  • Marland, S. P. (1972). Education of gifted and talented. (2 Vols.), Washington D.C: US Government Printing Office.
  • Maltese, A. V., Tai, H. R. (2011). Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of educational experiences with earned degrees in stem among US students. Science Education. 95 (5), 877–901.
  • Merrill, C. & Daugherty, J. (2009). The Future of TE Masters Degrees: STEM. Paper presented at the 70th Annual International Technology Education Association Conference, Louisville, Kentucky.
  • Morris, J., Slater, E., Fitzgerald, M. T., Lummis, G. W., & van Etten, E. (2019). Using local rural knowledge to enhance STEM learning for gifted and talented students in Australia. Research in Science Education, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019- 9823-2
  • Mullet, D. R., Kettler, T., & Sabatini, A. (2018). Gifted students’ conceptions of their high school STEM education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 41(1), 60-92.
  • Mun, R. U., & Hertzog, N. B. (2018). Teaching and learning in STEM enrichment spaces: From doing math to thinking mathematically. Roeper Review, 40(2), 121-129.
  • NAGC, (2015). STEM: Meeting a critical demand for excellence. http://www.nagc.org/resources-publications/resources/timely-topics/stem-meetingcritical-demand-excellence/gifted retrieved from URL, 02.12.2015.
  • National Research Council (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  • National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  • National Research Council. (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  • Newman, J. L., & Hubner, J. P. (2012). Designing challenging science experiences for highability learners through partnerships with university professors. Gifted Child Today, 35 (2), 102-115.
  • Nugent, G., Barker, B., Welch, G., Grandgenett, N., Wu, C. R. & Nelson, C. (2015). A model of factors contributing to STEM learning and career orientation. International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 37 (7), 1067–1088.
  • Obama, B. (2010). Remarks by the President on the "Educate to Innovate" Campaign and Science Teaching and Mentoring Awards. https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pressoffice/remarks-president-educate-innovate-campaign-and-science-teaching-andmentoring-awar retrieved from the URL, 02.11.2015.
  • Okulu, H. Z., Unver, A. O., & Arabacioglu, S. (2019). MUBEM & SAC: STEM Based science and nature camp. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health, 5(2), 266-282.
  • Olszewski-Kubilius, P. & Thomson, D. (2015). Talent development as a framework for gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 38 (1), 49-59.
  • Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2009). Special schools and other options for gifted STEM Students, Roeper Review, 32 (1), 61-70.
  • Onder, N., Oktay, O., Eraslan, F., Gulcicek, C., Goksu, V., Kanli, U., Eryilmaz, A., & Gunes B. (2013). Content analysis of physics education studies published in Turkish science education journal from 2004 to 2011. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 10(4), 151–163.
  • Özçelik, A., & Akgündüz, D. (2018). Evaluation of gifted/talented students’ out-of-School STEM education. Trakya University Journal of Education Faculty, 8(2), 334-351.
  • Park, S., Park, K., & Choe, H. (2005). The relationship between thinking styles and scientific giftedness in Korea. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 2/3, 87–97.
  • Park, G. (2011). When Less Is More: Effects of Grade Skipping On Adult Stem Accomplishments Among Mathematically Precocious Adolescents. Dissertation Submitted to The Faculty of the Graduate School of Vanderbilt University. Doctor of Philosophy in Psychology, Nashville, Tennessee.
  • Pyryt, M. C. (2000). Talent development in science and technology. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg & R.F. Subotnik (Eds.) International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed.) (427–438). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
  • Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S (2010). Is there still a need for gifted education? An examination of current research. Learning and Individual Differences 20, 4, 308–317.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1999). What is thing called giftedness and how do we develop it? A twentyfive-year perspective. Journal for the Education of Gifted, 23 (1), 3-54
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1988). The multiple menu model for developing differentiated curriculum for the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 298-309.
  • Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1985). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Rice, D. Bonner, F. Lewis, C. Alfred, M. Nave, F.M. & Frizell, S. (2016). Reversing the tide in science, engineering, technology and mathematics (STEM): Academically gifted African American students in historically black colleges & universities, Journal of Research Initiative, 2(1), 14.
  • Rinn, A. N., McQueen, K. S., Clark, G. L., & Rumsey, J. L. (2008). Gender differences in gifted adolescents’ math/verbal self- concepts and math/verbal achievement: implications for the STEM fields. Journal for the Education of the Gifted. 32 (1) 34– 53.
  • Roberts, J. L. (2013). The Gatton Academy: A case study of a state residential high school with a focus on mathematics and science. Gifted Child Today, 36 (3), 193-200.
  • Robinson, A., Dailey, D., Hughes, G., & Cotabish, A. (2014). Students' science knowledge and skills the effects of a science-focused stem intervention on gifted elementary. Journal of Advanced Academics, 25 (3), 189-213.
  • Root-Bernstein, R. (2015). Arts and crafts as adjuncts to STEM education to foster creativity in gifted and talented students. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16 (2), 203–212. Sahin A., Ayar M. C. & Adıguzel T. (2014). STEM related after-school program activities and associated outcomes on student learning. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14 (1), 309-322.
  • Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM Education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, 68 (4), 20-26.
  • Schlichter, C. L. (1986). Talents Unlimited: An in-service education model for teaching thinking skills. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30 (3), 119-123. Sikma, L. & Osborne, M. (2014). Conflicts in Developing an Elementary STEM Magnet School. Theory into Practice, 53 (1), 4-10.
  • Stake, J. E., & 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.
  • Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2017). Factors that contributed to gifted students’ success on STEM pathways: The role of race, personal interests, and aspects of high school experience. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40(2), 99-134.
  • Sternberg, R. J. (1981). Intelligence and non-entrenchment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 1–16.
  • Sternberg, R. J. (2018) Direct measurement of scientific giftedness, Roeper Review, 40(2), 78- 85.
  • Sternberg, R. J. (2019). Teaching and assessing gifted students in STEM disciplines through the augmented theory of successful intelligence. High Ability Studies, 30(1-2), 103- 126.
  • Stoeger, H., Hopp, M., & Ziegler, A. (2017). Online mentoring as an extracurricular measure to encourage talented girls in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics): An empirical study of one-on-one versus group mentoring. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(3), 239-249.
  • Subotnik, R., Orland, M., Rayhack, K., Schuck, J., Edmiston, A., Earle, J., Crowe, E., Johnson, P., Carroll, T., Berch, D. & Fuchs, B. (2009). International Handbook on Giftedness. In L.V. Shavinina (ed.), Identifying and Developing Talent in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): An Agenda for Research, Policy, and Practice (1313-1326), Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
  • Subotnik, R. F., & Calderon, J. (2008). Achieving excellence: Educating the gifted and talented. In F. Karnes & K. Stephens (Eds.), Developing giftedness and talent. (49– 61). Columbus, OH: Pearson.
  • Subotnik, R. F., Tai, R. H., Rickoff R., & Almarode J. (2010) Specialized public high schools of science, mathematics, and technology and the STEM pipeline: What do we know now and what will we know in 5 years? Roeper Review, 32 (1), 7-16.
  • Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P, & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12, 3-54.
  • Taber, K. S. (2007). Science education for gifted learners. In Taber KS (Ed.) Science education for gifted learners? (1-14), Routledge, NY, USA.
  • Taber, K. S. (2010). Challenging gifted learners: general principles for science educators; and exemplification in the context of teaching chemistry. Science Education International, 21 (1), 5-30.
  • Talaue, F. T. (2014). Social equity and access to a Philippine STEM school, Theory into Practice, 53 (1), 33-40.
  • Tay, J., Salazar, A., & Lee, H. (2018). Parental perceptions of STEM enrichment for young children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 41(1), 5-23.
  • Thomas, J. & Williams, C. (2009). The history of specialized STEM schools and the formation and role of the NCSSSMST, Roeper Review, 32 (1), 17-24.
  • Tomlinson, C. A., Kaplan, S. N., Renzulli, J. S., Purcell, J., Leppien, J., & Burns, D. (2002). The parallel curriculum: A design to develop high potential and challenge high-ability learners. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
  • Tomlinson, C. A. (1996). Good teaching for one and all: Does gifted education have an instructional identity? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20(2), 155-174.
  • Tofel-Grehl, C., Feldon, D. F., & Callahan, C. M. (2018). Impacts of learning standards and testing on gifted learners in STEM schools: A multilevel analytic induction. Roeper Review, 40(2), 130-138.
  • Tortop, H. S., & Akyildiz, V. (2018). Development study of gifted students’ education for stem self-efficacy belief scale for teacher. Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity, 5(3), 11-22.
  • Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st Century Skills: Learning for Life in Our Times. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Tofel-Grehl, C., & Callahan, C. M. (2017). STEM high schools teachers’ belief regarding STEM student giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(1), 40-51.
  • Torkar, G., Avsec, S., Čepič, M., Ferk Savec, V., & Juriševič, M. (2018). Science and technology education in Slovenian compulsory basic school: Possibilities for gifted education. Roeper Review, 40(2), 139-150.
  • Tsai, C.C., & Wen, M.L. (2005) Research and trends in science education from 1998 to 2002: a content analysis of publication in selected journals. Int J Sci Educ 27(1), 3–14.
  • Twissell, A. (2011). An investigation into the use of cognitive ability tests in the identification of gifted students in design and technology. Design and Technology Education, 16 (2), 20-32.
  • Unal, S., Calik, M., Ayas, A., Coll, R. K. (2006). A review of chemical bonding studies: needs, aims, methods of exploring students’ conceptions, general knowledge claims and students’ alternative conceptions. Res Sci Technol Educ 24(2), 141–172.
  • Uttal, D. H. & Cohen, C. A. (2012). Psychology of learning and motivation. In B Ross (Ed.) Spatial thinking and STEM education: When, why and how? Vol. 57, Elsevier Inc., USA.
  • Van der Vlies, J. (2013.) Interests, social relations and the preference for study and future profession of talented students participating in a gifted program for science and mathematics. Master Thesis, Educational Design and Counseling, University of Utrecht, Faculty of Social Science.
  • VanTassel-Baska, J. (1986). Effective curriculum and instruction models for talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 164–169.
  • VanTassel-Baska, J., Gallagher, S., Bailey, J., & Sher, B. (1993). Scientific experimentation. Gifted Child Today, 16 (5), 42-46.
  • VanTassel-Baska, J., & Wood, S. (2010). The integrated curriculum model (ICM). Learning and Individual Differences, 20(4), 345-357.
  • Vu, P., Harshbarger, D., Crow, S., & Henderson, S. (2019). Why STEM? Factors that influence gifted students’ choice of college majors. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 3(2), 63-71.
  • Wai, J., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., & Steiger, J. H. (2010). Accomplishment in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and Its Relation to STEM Educational Dose: A 25-Year Longitudinal Study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102 (4), 860–871.
  • Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P., (2009). Spatial Ability for STEM Domains: Aligning Over 50 Years of Cumulative Psychological Knowledge Solidifies Its Importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101 (4), 817–835.
  • Watters, J. J. & Diezmann, C. M. (2003) The gifted student in science: Fulfilling potential. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 49(3), 46-53.
  • Wilson, H. E. (2018). Integrating the arts and STEM for gifted learners. Roeper review, 40(2), 108-120.
  • Wilson, Z. S., Iyengar, S. S., Pang, S., Warner, I. M., & Luces, C. A. (2012) Increasing Access for Economically Disadvantaged Students: The NSF/CSEM & S-STEM Programs at Louisiana State University Students. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 21, 581–587.
  • Wu, I. C., Pease, R., & Maker, C. J. (2019). Students’ perceptions of a special program for developing exceptional talent in STEM. Journal of Advanced Academics, 30(4), 474- 499.
  • Yoon, S. Y., & Mann, E. L. (2017). Exploring the spatial ability of undergraduate students: association with gender, STEM majors, and gifted program membership. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(4), 313-327.
  • Young, J. L., Young, J. R., & Ford, D. Y. (2017). Standing in the gaps: Examining the effects of early gifted education on Black girl achievement in STEM. Journal of Advanced Academics, 28(4), 290-312.
  • Young, J. L., Young, J. R., & Ford, D. Y. (2019). Culturally relevant STEM out-of-school time: A rationale to support gifted girls of color. Roeper Review, 41(1), 8-19.
  • Yu, H. P., & Jen, E. (2019). The gender role and career self-efficacy of gifted girls in STEM areas. High Ability Studies, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2019.1705767
  • Zeidler, D. L. (2014). STEM education: A deficit framework for the twenty first century? A sociocultural socioscientific response. Cultural Studies of Science Education, DOI: 10.1007/s11422-014-9578-z.
  • Zuckerman, H. (1996). Scientific elite: Nobel laureates in the United States. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
APA ÜLGER B, Cepni S (2020). Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review. , 443 - 466. 10.36681/tused.2020.38
Chicago ÜLGER BESTAMI BUGRA,Cepni Salih Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review. (2020): 443 - 466. 10.36681/tused.2020.38
MLA ÜLGER BESTAMI BUGRA,Cepni Salih Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review. , 2020, ss.443 - 466. 10.36681/tused.2020.38
AMA ÜLGER B,Cepni S Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review. . 2020; 443 - 466. 10.36681/tused.2020.38
Vancouver ÜLGER B,Cepni S Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review. . 2020; 443 - 466. 10.36681/tused.2020.38
IEEE ÜLGER B,Cepni S "Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review." , ss.443 - 466, 2020. 10.36681/tused.2020.38
ISNAD ÜLGER, BESTAMI BUGRA - Cepni, Salih. "Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review". (2020), 443-466. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2020.38
APA ÜLGER B, Cepni S (2020). Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(3), 443 - 466. 10.36681/tused.2020.38
Chicago ÜLGER BESTAMI BUGRA,Cepni Salih Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review. Journal of Turkish Science Education 17, no.3 (2020): 443 - 466. 10.36681/tused.2020.38
MLA ÜLGER BESTAMI BUGRA,Cepni Salih Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review. Journal of Turkish Science Education, vol.17, no.3, 2020, ss.443 - 466. 10.36681/tused.2020.38
AMA ÜLGER B,Cepni S Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review. Journal of Turkish Science Education. 2020; 17(3): 443 - 466. 10.36681/tused.2020.38
Vancouver ÜLGER B,Cepni S Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review. Journal of Turkish Science Education. 2020; 17(3): 443 - 466. 10.36681/tused.2020.38
IEEE ÜLGER B,Cepni S "Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review." Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17, ss.443 - 466, 2020. 10.36681/tused.2020.38
ISNAD ÜLGER, BESTAMI BUGRA - Cepni, Salih. "Gifted education and STEM: A Thematic Review". Journal of Turkish Science Education 17/3 (2020), 443-466. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2020.38
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
23-04-2024 18:43

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları