Browse > Article

A case study of the emotional changes of the mathematically gifted during mathematics gifted camp program  

Yi, Seung-Hun (Sciences and Liberal Arts (Mathematics), Youngdong University)
Lee, Sae-Na (Department of Early Childhood Education, Youngdong University)
Publication Information
Communications of Mathematical Education / v.24, no.1, 2010 , pp. 107-122 More about this Journal
Abstract
Mathematically gifted students' emotional changes during Mathematical Olympiad training camp were studied. The emotions of the gifted during the camp were fluctuated significantly by comparing their test scores with other camp attendants, while the morale was high at the beginning. The camp attendants were likely to overcome disappointment resulting from bad scores with putting more efforts on studying, which means their self-assessments for their mathematical talents are not affected by test results. From what characterizes the emotional changes of the gifted, we conclude as follows: First, they tend to be positive on grouping classes depending on the mathematical ability. Second, careful emotional supports and care were needed in ability grouping education. Third, it is important to let the gifted have more chances to communicate with other camp attendants. It is recommended to induce the gifted to put their focus on the learning goal. Fifth, the proper environment helps the gifted be indulged in studying mathematics.
Keywords
mathematically gifted students; mathematical olympiad; camp program; emotional change;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 4  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 석경희 (2003). 영재과학캠프를 통한 학습자특성에 따른 학습선호도특성 및 학습모형과의 관계분석, 공주대학교 석사학위논문.
2 심재영.정세환.이길승 (2007). 국제과학올림피아드 참가자의 진로에 대한 연구, 영재교육연구 17(1), pp.145-171.   과학기술학회마을
3 Whitmore, J. R. (1980). Giftedness, conflict, and underachivement, Needham Heights, MA: Allym and Bacon.
4 Karp, A (2003). Thirty years after : The lives of former winners of mathematical Olympiads. Roeper Review, 25(2), pp.83-87.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Kulik, J. A , & Kulik, C.-L. (1991). Ability grouping and gifted students. In N. Colangello and G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp.178-106), Needham Heights, MA; Allyn and Bacon.
6 Mayers, P. (1978). Flow in adolescence and its relation to the school experience. Unpublished doctorial dissertation, University of Chicago.
7 Rimm, S. B. (1986). Underachievement syndrom : causes and cures, Wisconsin : Apple Publishing Company.
8 Rogers, K. B. (1991). The relationship of grouping practices to the education of gofted and talented learners, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, Univerisity of Connecticut.
9 Stanley, J. C. (1991). An academic model for educating the mathematically talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, pp.36-42.   DOI
10 Kim, A, & Clifford, M. M. (1988). Goal Source, goal difficulty, and individual difference variables as predictors fo response to failure, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, pp.28-43.   DOI
11 Kulik, J. A. (1991). Ability grouping and gifted students, Invited address presented at the National Research Symposium on Talented Development, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.
12 Kulik, J. A. (1992). An aralysis of the research on grouping: Historical and contemporary perspectives. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, Univerisity of Connecticut.
13 Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety, San Francisco; Jossey Bass.
14 Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow; The Psychology of Optimal Experience, New York; Harper & Row.
15 이정.강완 (2007). 초등 수학 영재 프로그램에 참가하는 학생의 인식 분석, 한국수학교육학회지 시리즈 E <수학교육 논문집> 21(1), pp.107-124.   과학기술학회마을
16 Csikszentmihalyi, M, & Csikszentmihalyi, I. (1988). Optimal experience: Psychological of flow in consciousness, Cambridge University Press.
17 Elliot, A, & McGregor, H. (2001). A $2{\times}2$ achievement goal framework, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 80(3), pp.501-519.   DOI
18 Clifford, M. M., Kim, A., & MacDonald, B. A. (1998). Responds to failure as influenced by task attribution, outcome attribution, and failure tolerance, Journal of Exxperimental Education 57, pp.19-37.
19 Clinkenbeard, P. R. (1989). The motivation to win-Negative aspects of success at competition, Journal for the education of the gifted 12(4), pp.293-305.   DOI
20 이세나.이승훈.한석실 (2009). 수학영재학생들과 일반학생들의 학습관련 인식과 정의적 특성 비교, 아동학회지 30(5), pp.73-85.
21 석임복 (2008). 학습 몰입의 성격 분석 연구- 학습 동기, 학업성취도 및 Csikszentmihalyi의 몰입 모델 중심으로-, 교육공학연구 24(1), pp.187-212.
22 신영희 (2005). 중학교 과학.수학 영재학생과 일반학생의 학업적 자기조절 동기유형과 실패내성 및 자아존중감간의 관계, 이화여자대학교 석사학위 논문.
23 심재영 (2007). 국제과학올림피아드 참가자의 진로 및 성취, 진로교육연구 20(4), pp.39-56.
24 이상원.방승진 (2003). 주제탐구 중심의 수학영재 캠프-초등학교 중심-, 한국수학교육학회지 시리즈 E <수학교육 논문집> 17, pp.31-48.   과학기술학회마을
25 류지영 (2006). 고교 정보과학 영재 캠프프로그램이 자기효능감과 자아존중감에 미치는 영향, 청소년학연구 13(3), pp.181-202.
26 박종석.오원근.박종욱.정병훈 (1999). 과학캠프 활동 평가를 통해 추출한 과학 영재 프로그램의 적절성 준거, 한국과학교육학회지 19(2), pp.329-339.
27 박종원.이종원.오원근.박종석 (2000). 과학 영재 교육 프로그램에 대한 분석 연구 - 물리영역을 중심으로, 영재교육연구 10(1), pp.75-104.
28 송인섭.이신동.이경화.최병연.박숙희 (2001). 영재교육의 이론과 방법. 학문사; Education of the gifted and talented, Davis, G. A. & Rimm S. B.
29 김명숙 (1997). "중등학교에서의 영재교육의 실제", 학교급별 영재교육의 실제와 발전방안, 한국영재학회 1997년도 추계학술세미나 및 워크샵, 한국영재학회, pp.69-97.
30 교육인적자원부 (2007). 제 2차 영재교육진흥종합계획, 교육인적자원부.