BibTex RIS Cite

USTUN ZEKALI VE YETENEKLİLERDE CİNSİYET FARKLILIĞI

Year 2011, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 105 - 117, 05.06.2012

Sezen Camcı

Abstract

Uzun yıllardır pek çok çalışmaya konu olan eğitimde cinsiyet farklılığı, üstün zekalı ve yeteneklilerin eğitimi ile ilgili çalışmaların son yıllarda ivme kazanması ile “üstün zekalı ve yetenekli bireylerde cinsiyet farklılığı” olarak farklı bir boyut kazanmıştır. Özellikle fen, matematik ve mühendislik alanlarında üstün kadınların temsil düzeyinin düşüklüğünün nedenlerini; üstün zekalı ve yetenekli bireylerde görülen cinsiyet farklılıklarının yetenek, motivasyon ya da sosyal toplumun bu bireylerden beklediği cinsiyet rollerinin farklı olmasından mı kaynaklandığını konu alan çalışmalara literatürde sıkça rastlanmaktadır. Literatür taraması şeklinde planlanan bu çalışmanın, öğretmenlere, ailelere ve üstün zekalıların eğitimi alanıyla ilgilenen bilim insanlarına üstün zekalılarda cinsiyet farklılıkları açısından önemli bilgiler vermesi amaçlanmaktadır. Cinsiyet farklılığının sebeplerinin ve etkilerinin eğitimciler ve aileler tarafından anlaşılması; çocuklara etkili eğitim verilmesi, doğru mentörlük ve kariyer seçimlerinin yapılması ve sosyal uyumlarının sağlanması açısından önem arz etmektedir. Araştırma, üstün kız ve erkek çocukların cinsiyet karmaşalarını ortaya koyarken, cinsiyet farklılığından olumsuz etkilenme noktasında üstün kız çocuklarının erkek çocuklara göre daha çok risk taşıdığını belirtmektedir.

Keywords

Üstün Zekalı ve Yetenekli Cinsiyet Farklılığı Üstün Kızlar

References

  • Barbara Schober, B., Reimann, R., Wagner, P. (2004). Is research on genderspecific underachievement in gifted girls an obsolete topic? Ne w findings on an often discussed issue. High Ability Studies, 15, 1.
  • Benbow, C.P. (1992). Academi c Achievement in Mathematics and science of students between ages 13 and 23: Are there differences amon g students in the top one percent of mathematical ability? Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 51-61 .
  • Benbow, C.P. Lubinski, D., Shea, D.L., Eftekhari-Sanjani, H. (2000). Se x differences in mathematical reasoning ability at age 13: Their status 20 years later. Psychological Science, 11 , 474-480.
  • Bleeker, M.M., Jacobs, J.E. (2004). Achievement in math and science: Do mothers'beliefs matter 12 years later? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 97-109.
  • Brody, L.E., Fox, L.H. (1980). An accelerative intervention program for mathematically gifted girls. L.H. Fox, L. Brody & D. Tobin (Ed). Women and the mathematical mystique. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
  • Buescher, T, Higham, S. (1989). A developmental study of adjustment among gifted adolescents. J.L. VanTassel-Baska & P. Olszewski-Kubilius (Ed.). Patterns of influence on gifted learners. New York: Teacher s College Press.
  • Casserly, P.L. (1979). Helping able young wome n take math and science seriouslyin school. N. Colangelo & R.T. Zaffrann (Ed.). New voices in counseling the gifted. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
  • Davis, G, Rimm , S. (2004). The Cultural Underachievement of Females. Education of The Gifted and Talented. (5th ed). Massachusets: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Dunnell, P., Bakken L. (1991). Gifted high school students' attitudes towards careers and sex roles. Rooper Review, 13/4, 198.
  • Eccles, J . S. (1994). Understanding women' s educational and occupational choises: applying the Eccles et al. Model of achievement-related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 585-610.
  • Ernest, J . (1976). Mathematics and sex. American Mathematical Monthly, 83, 595-614.
  • Freeman, J . (2004). Cultural influences on gifted gender achievement. High Ability Studies,15, 1.
  • Greene, M. J . (2003). Career counseling of the gifted and talented. Rooper Review, 25/2, 66.
  • Hargreaves, M., Homer, M., Swinnerton, B. (2008). A comparison of performance and attitudes in mathematics amongs t the 'gifted'. Are boys better at mathematics or do they just think they are? Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 15, 1, 19-38.
  • Hebert, T. P. (2001). "If I had a new notebook, I know things would change": Bright underachieving young men in urban classrooms. Gifted Child Ouarterly, 45, 174-194.
  • Karnes, F.A., D'llio, V.R.(1989). Leadreship positions and sex role stereotyping amon g gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 33, 76-78.
  • Lubinski, D., Benbow C.P. (1992). Gender differences in abilities and preferences amon g the gifted: Implicaitons for the maths-science pipeline. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 61-66.
  • Matthews & Foster. (2005). Difference Between Boys and Girls. Being Smart about Gifted Children. Great Potential: ABD .
  • Obringer, J., Obringer, M. (1995). Gender Differences In Intellectual Profiles of Gifted Male and Female Elementary Students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association.
  • Olszewski-Kubilius, P., Lee, S. (2011). Gender and Other Group Differences in Performance on Off-Level Tests: Changes in the 21st Century. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55: 54.
  • Preckel, F., Goetz, T., Pekrun, R., Kleine, M. (2008). Gender differences in gifted and average-ability students: comparing girl's and boy's achievement, self-concept, interest, and motivation in mathematics. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 2.
  • Reis, S., Hebert, T. (2008). Gender and giftedness. S. Pfeiffer (Eds.), Giftedness in Children, 271-292, Florida: Springer.
  • Reis, S.M., McCoach, B. (2000). The Underachievement of Gifted Students: What Do W e Know and Wher e Do W e Go? Gifted Child Quarterly, 44,152-170.
  • Rubin, J.Z., Provenzano, F, Luria, Z. (1974). The eye of the beholder: parents' view on sex of newborns. The American Journal Of Orthopsychiatry, 44 (4), 512-521 .
  • Ryan, J.J., (1999). Behind the mask: exploring the need for the specialized counseling for the gifted females. Gifted Child Today Magazine, 22/5, 14-17.
  • Silverman, L. (1993). Gender issues. L.K. Silverman (Eds.), Counseling the gifted & talented, 295-306, Colorado: Love Publishing Company .
  • Spelke, E.S., Grace, A. D. (2007). Sex, math, and Science.W. M. Williams & S.J. Ceci (Eds.), Why aren't more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence. 57-67, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Tenenbaum , H.R., Leaper, C. (2003). Parent-child conversation about science: The socialization of gender inequities? Developmental Psychology, 39, 34-47.

Year 2011, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 105 - 117, 05.06.2012

Sezen Camcı

Abstract

References

  • Barbara Schober, B., Reimann, R., Wagner, P. (2004). Is research on genderspecific underachievement in gifted girls an obsolete topic? Ne w findings on an often discussed issue. High Ability Studies, 15, 1.
  • Benbow, C.P. (1992). Academi c Achievement in Mathematics and science of students between ages 13 and 23: Are there differences amon g students in the top one percent of mathematical ability? Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 51-61 .
  • Benbow, C.P. Lubinski, D., Shea, D.L., Eftekhari-Sanjani, H. (2000). Se x differences in mathematical reasoning ability at age 13: Their status 20 years later. Psychological Science, 11 , 474-480.
  • Bleeker, M.M., Jacobs, J.E. (2004). Achievement in math and science: Do mothers'beliefs matter 12 years later? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 97-109.
  • Brody, L.E., Fox, L.H. (1980). An accelerative intervention program for mathematically gifted girls. L.H. Fox, L. Brody & D. Tobin (Ed). Women and the mathematical mystique. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
  • Buescher, T, Higham, S. (1989). A developmental study of adjustment among gifted adolescents. J.L. VanTassel-Baska & P. Olszewski-Kubilius (Ed.). Patterns of influence on gifted learners. New York: Teacher s College Press.
  • Casserly, P.L. (1979). Helping able young wome n take math and science seriouslyin school. N. Colangelo & R.T. Zaffrann (Ed.). New voices in counseling the gifted. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
  • Davis, G, Rimm , S. (2004). The Cultural Underachievement of Females. Education of The Gifted and Talented. (5th ed). Massachusets: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Dunnell, P., Bakken L. (1991). Gifted high school students' attitudes towards careers and sex roles. Rooper Review, 13/4, 198.
  • Eccles, J . S. (1994). Understanding women' s educational and occupational choises: applying the Eccles et al. Model of achievement-related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 585-610.
  • Ernest, J . (1976). Mathematics and sex. American Mathematical Monthly, 83, 595-614.
  • Freeman, J . (2004). Cultural influences on gifted gender achievement. High Ability Studies,15, 1.
  • Greene, M. J . (2003). Career counseling of the gifted and talented. Rooper Review, 25/2, 66.
  • Hargreaves, M., Homer, M., Swinnerton, B. (2008). A comparison of performance and attitudes in mathematics amongs t the 'gifted'. Are boys better at mathematics or do they just think they are? Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 15, 1, 19-38.
  • Hebert, T. P. (2001). "If I had a new notebook, I know things would change": Bright underachieving young men in urban classrooms. Gifted Child Ouarterly, 45, 174-194.
  • Karnes, F.A., D'llio, V.R.(1989). Leadreship positions and sex role stereotyping amon g gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 33, 76-78.
  • Lubinski, D., Benbow C.P. (1992). Gender differences in abilities and preferences amon g the gifted: Implicaitons for the maths-science pipeline. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 61-66.
  • Matthews & Foster. (2005). Difference Between Boys and Girls. Being Smart about Gifted Children. Great Potential: ABD .
  • Obringer, J., Obringer, M. (1995). Gender Differences In Intellectual Profiles of Gifted Male and Female Elementary Students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association.
  • Olszewski-Kubilius, P., Lee, S. (2011). Gender and Other Group Differences in Performance on Off-Level Tests: Changes in the 21st Century. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55: 54.
  • Preckel, F., Goetz, T., Pekrun, R., Kleine, M. (2008). Gender differences in gifted and average-ability students: comparing girl's and boy's achievement, self-concept, interest, and motivation in mathematics. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 2.
  • Reis, S., Hebert, T. (2008). Gender and giftedness. S. Pfeiffer (Eds.), Giftedness in Children, 271-292, Florida: Springer.
  • Reis, S.M., McCoach, B. (2000). The Underachievement of Gifted Students: What Do W e Know and Wher e Do W e Go? Gifted Child Quarterly, 44,152-170.
  • Rubin, J.Z., Provenzano, F, Luria, Z. (1974). The eye of the beholder: parents' view on sex of newborns. The American Journal Of Orthopsychiatry, 44 (4), 512-521 .
  • Ryan, J.J., (1999). Behind the mask: exploring the need for the specialized counseling for the gifted females. Gifted Child Today Magazine, 22/5, 14-17.
  • Silverman, L. (1993). Gender issues. L.K. Silverman (Eds.), Counseling the gifted & talented, 295-306, Colorado: Love Publishing Company .
  • Spelke, E.S., Grace, A. D. (2007). Sex, math, and Science.W. M. Williams & S.J. Ceci (Eds.), Why aren't more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence. 57-67, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Tenenbaum , H.R., Leaper, C. (2003). Parent-child conversation about science: The socialization of gender inequities? Developmental Psychology, 39, 34-47.
There are 28 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Sezen Camcı

Publication Date June 5, 2012
Published in Issue Year 2011 Volume: 8 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Camcı, S. (2012). USTUN ZEKALI VE YETENEKLİLERDE CİNSİYET FARKLILIĞI. HAYEF Journal of Education, 8(2), 105-117.
AMA Camcı S. USTUN ZEKALI VE YETENEKLİLERDE CİNSİYET FARKLILIĞI. HAYEF Journal of Education. June 2012;8(2):105-117.
Chicago Camcı, Sezen. “USTUN ZEKALI VE YETENEKLİLERDE CİNSİYET FARKLILIĞI”. HAYEF Journal of Education 8, no. 2 (June 2012): 105-17.
EndNote Camcı S (June 1, 2012) USTUN ZEKALI VE YETENEKLİLERDE CİNSİYET FARKLILIĞI. HAYEF Journal of Education 8 2 105–117.
IEEE S. Camcı, “USTUN ZEKALI VE YETENEKLİLERDE CİNSİYET FARKLILIĞI”, HAYEF Journal of Education, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 105–117, 2012.
ISNAD Camcı, Sezen. “USTUN ZEKALI VE YETENEKLİLERDE CİNSİYET FARKLILIĞI”. HAYEF Journal of Education 8/2 (June 2012), 105-117.
JAMA Camcı S. USTUN ZEKALI VE YETENEKLİLERDE CİNSİYET FARKLILIĞI. HAYEF Journal of Education. 2012;8:105–117.
MLA Camcı, Sezen. “USTUN ZEKALI VE YETENEKLİLERDE CİNSİYET FARKLILIĞI”. HAYEF Journal of Education, vol. 8, no. 2, 2012, pp. 105-17.
Vancouver Camcı S. USTUN ZEKALI VE YETENEKLİLERDE CİNSİYET FARKLILIĞI. HAYEF Journal of Education. 2012;8(2):105-17.
 Download Cover Image