Volume 11 Issue 3 (2022)

Metaphorical Perceptions of Gifted Students towards Mathematics and Science Concepts

pp. 97-121  |  Published Online: September 2022  |  DOI: 10.22521/edupij.2022.113.6

Duygu Özdemir, Ayşegül Kınık Topalsan


Background/purpose – Understanding gifted students’ perceptions by means of metaphors, carefully examining and interpreting them may help to guide the organization of training programs and the differentiation of educational content for gifted students. This study aims to reveal the perceptions of gifted students regarding science and mathematics concepts as well school math, school science, scientist, experiments, and problem-solving perceptions by examining students’ metaphors.

Materials/methods – 30 gifted students studying at a children’s university, which was established by a foundation university in Istanbul, Turkey, were selected as the study’s participants based on convenience, criterion, and accessibility sampling methods. To reveal the students’ metaphorical perceptions, gifted students were asked about their metaphors for “mathematics,” “science,” “mathematics lessons at school,” and “science lessons at school.” Data were collected using a Metaphorical Perception Form, and then transferred to the QDA Mine Lite program for qualitative data analysis, which included coding and the creation of categories and themes.

Results –Metaphors about mathematics, Metaphors about school mathematics, Metaphors about science, and Metaphors about school science were obtained as the themes of the study.

Conclusion – In a general sense, three categories of findings were obtained across all four themes. For metaphors about mathematics, the categories were “favorable,” “relating,” and “difficulty level”; whilst for school mathematics they were “favorable,” “relating,” and “unfavorable”; for science they were “favorable,” “relating,” and “difficulty level”; and for school science they were “favorable,” “relating,” and “unfavorable.”

Keywords: Gifted students, mathematics, metaphor, science


Aktamış, H., & Dönmez, G. (2016). Ortaokul Öğrencilerinin Fen Bilimleri Dersine, Bilime, Fen Bilimleri Öğretmenine ve Bilim İnsanına Yönelik Metaforik Algıları [Metaphorical perceptions of middle school students towards science lesson, science, science teacher and scientist]. Journal of Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Education, 35(1), 7-30. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/omuefd/issue/26353/277704

Alelyani, S. O. (2020). Special educational need of the gifted and talented students in Saudi Arabia: A review paper. International Journal of Educational Research Review, 6(2), 124-133. https://doi.org/10.24331/ijere.854926

Anilan, B. (2018). Views and experiences of pre-service teachers on the use of stories in teaching science. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 17(4), 605. http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/jbse/files/pdf/vol17/605-619.Anilan_JBSE_Vol.17_No.4.pdf

Arikan, E. E., & Unal, H. (2015). An investigation of eighth grade students’ problem posing skills (Turkey sample). International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 1(1), 23-30. https://www.ijres.net/index.php/ijres/article/view/14

Arslan, M. M., & Bayrakçi, M. (2006). Examination of metaphorical thinking and learning approach in terms of education. Journal of National Education, 35(171), 100-108. https://acikerisim.kku.edu.tr:8443/xmlui/handle/20.500.12587/1866

Bartan, M. (2019). Okul öncesi Öğretmen Adaylarının Bilim İnsanı Kavramlarına İlişkin Metaforik Algıları: Kütahya Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Örneği [Metaphorical perceptions of preschool teachers towards scientists: The case of Kütahya universities]. Amasya Education Journal, 8(2), 215-239. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/amauefd/issue/50660/531353

Baykoç, N. (2014). Üstün Akıl Zeka Deha Yetenek Dahiler Savantlar Gelişimleri ve Eğitimleri [Development and training of gifted people]. Vize Press

Ben-Peretz, M., Mendelson, N., & Kron, F. W. (2003). How teachers in different educational contexts view their roles. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(2), 277-290. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00100-2

Bilgiç, N., & Ataman, A. (2019). A qualitative study on the education policies of gifted and talented individuals. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Research, 13(30), 415-438.

Bircan, M. A., & Köksal, Ç. (2020). Investigation of STEM attitudes and STEM career interests of gifted students. Turkish Journal of Primary Education, 5(1), 16-32. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tujped/issue/55035/738824

Caleon, I. S., & Subramaniam, R. (2010). Do students know what they know and what they don’t know? Using a four-tier diagnostic test to assess the nature of students’ alternative conceptions. Research in Science Education, 40(3), 313-337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9122-4

Cerit, Y. (2008). Students, teachers and administrators views on metaphors with respect to the concept of teacher. Turkish Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(4), 693-712. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tebd/issue/26110/275093

Creswell, J. W. (1999). Mixed-method research: Introduction and application. In Handbook of educational policy. Academic Press.

Çekirdekci, S. (2020). Metaphorical perceptions of fourth-grade primary students towards mathematics lesson. International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, 7(4), 114-131. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/pes/issue/57050/804085

Çetinkaya, M., Özgören, Ç., Orakci, S., & Özdemir, M. Ç. (2018). Metaphorical perceptions of middle school students towards math. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 31-44. https://www.e-iji.net/dosyalar/iji_2018_3_3.pdf

Derman, A. (2014). High school students’ metaphoric conceptions for the concept of chemistry. Turkish Studies - International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 9(5), 749-776. http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.6738

Dimitriadis, C. (2016). Gifted programs cannot be successful without gifted research and theory: Evidence from practice with gifted students of mathematics. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 39(3), 221-236. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353216657185

Di Paola, S., Domaneschi, F., & Pouscoulous, N. (2020). Metaphorical developing minds: The role of multiple factors in the development of metaphor comprehension. Journal of Pragmatics, 156, 235-251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.08.008

Dovigo, F. (2020). Through the eyes of inclusion: an evaluation of video analysis as a reflective tool for student teachers within special education. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(1), 110-126. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2019.1693996

Fonseca, C. (2011). Emotional intensity in gifted students: Helping kids cope with explosive feelings. Prufrock.

Gadanidis, G., Hughes, J., & Cordy, M. (2011). Mathematics for gifted students in an arts-and technology-rich setting. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34(3), 397-433. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235321103400303

Gallagher, J. J. (2000). Unthinkable thoughts: Education of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44(1), 5-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620004400102

Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (2014). Embodied metaphor. In J. Littlemore & J. R. Taylor (Eds.), The Bloomsbury companion to cognitive linguistics (pp. 167-184). Bloomsbury.

Girmen, P. (2007). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin konuşma ve yazma sürecinde metaforlardan yararlanma durumları [The use of metaphors in the speaking and writing process of primary school students] [Doctoral dissertation, Anadolu University, Turkey]. https://earsiv.anadolu.edu.tr/xmlui/handle/11421/3386

Hamilton, E. R. (2016). Picture This: Multimodal representations of prospective teachers’ metaphors about teachers and teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 55, 33-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.12.007

Heinze, A. (2005). Differences in problem solving strategies of mathematically gifted and non-gifted elementary students. International Education Journal, 6(2), 175-183. http://ijdri.com/iej/2005/2005may.pdf

Hornstra, L., Bakx, A., Mathijssen, S., & Denissen, J. J. (2020). Motivating gifted and non-gifted students in regular primary schools: A self-determination perspective. Learning and Individual Differences, 80, Article 101871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101871

Idin, S., & Donmez, I. (2017). The views of Turkish science teachers about gender equity within science education. Science Education International, 28(2), 119-127. http://www.icaseonline.net/journal/index.php/sei/article/view/25

Johnsen, S. K. (2004). Making decisions about placement. In S. K. Johnsen (Ed.), Identifying gifted students: a practical guide (Chap 5). Prufrock.

Kalaycı, S. (2018). Determining primary school students’ perceptions of the concepts of “science” and “science lesson” through metaphor. International Journal of Social and Educational Sciences, 5(9), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.20860/ijoses.351611

Kanlı, E. (2017). Examining the relationships between gifted students’ scientific creativity levels, gender and scientific attitudes. Elementary Education Online, 16(4), 1793-1802. http://dx.doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2017.342992

Kanlı, E., & Emir, S. (2009). The effect of problem-based learning on the motivation levels of gifted and normal students in science and technology teaching. Sakarya University Faculty of Education Journal, 0(18), 42-61. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/sakaefd/issue/11214/133928

Köse, E. (2018). Effect of secondary school students’ metaphorical perceptions regarding mathematics classes and mathematics teachers on achievement. International Journal of Psycho-Educational Sciences, 7(1), 112-124.

Koshy, V., Ernest, P., & Casey, R. (2009). Mathematically gifted and talented learners: Theory and practice. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 40(2), 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390802566907

Kövecses, L. Z. (2002). Emotion concepts: Social constructionism and cognitive linguistics. Psychology Press.

Law, C., & Kaufhold, J. A. (2009). An analysis of the use of critical thinking skills in reading and language arts instruction. Reading improvement, 46(1), 29-35.

Lehner, M. (2016). Visualizing individual conceptual development paths in faculty development. Zeitschrift für Hochschulentwicklung, 11(5), 125-143. https://zfhe.at/index.php/zfhe/article/view/963

Löfström, E., & Poom-Valickis, K. (2013). Beliefs about teaching: Persistent or malleable? A longitudinal study of prospective student teachers’ beliefs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 35, 104-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.06.004

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2014). Designing qualitative research. Sage.

Martı́nez, M. A., Sauleda, N., & Huber, G. L. (2001). Metaphors as blueprints of thinking about teaching and learning. Teaching and Teacher education, 17(8), 965-977. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00043-9

Massengill, D., Mahlios, M., & Barry, A. (2005). Metaphors and sense of teaching: How these constructs influence novice teachers. Teaching Education, 16(3), 213-229. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210500204887

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.

Minas, R., & Gündoğdu, K. (2013). Investigation of Metaphoric Perceptions of Secondary School Students towards Some Concepts of Science and Technology Lesson. Adnan Menderes University Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(2), 67-77. http://adudspace.adu.edu.tr:8080/jspui/handle/11607/2793

Montuschi, E. (2017). Metaphor in science. A companion to the philosophy of science. Wiley.

Musolff, A., & Zinken, J. (Eds.). (2009). Metaphor and discourse. Palgrave Macmillan.

Niebert, K., & Gropengiesser, H. (2015). Understanding begins in the mesocosm: Conceptual metaphor as a framework for external representations in science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 37(5-6), 903-933. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1025310

Noyes, A. (2006). Using metaphor in mathematics teacher preparation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(7), 898-909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.04.009

Olsen, J., Lew, K., & Weber, K. (2020). Metaphors for learning and doing mathematics in advanced mathematics lectures. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 105(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09968-x

Öztürk, M., Akkan, Y., & Kaplan, A. (2014). Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Matematik Kavramına Yönelik Algılarının İncelenmesi [Examining the perceptions of gifted students towards the concept of mathematics]. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 2(2), 49-57. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/jegys/issue/37434/432929

Preckel, F., Holling, H., & Vock, M. (2006). Academic underachievement: Relationship with cognitive motivation, achievement motivation, and conscientiousness. Psychology in the Schools, 43(3), 401-411. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20154

Richardson, J. T. (2011). Approaches to studying, conceptions of learning and learning styles in higher education. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(3), 288-293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.11.015

Rızvanoğlu, K. (2007). The cross-cultural understanding of the metaphors in the graphical user interfaces (a comparative study in France and Turkey on an e-learning site) [Doctoral dissertation, Marmara University, Turkey]. https://www.proquest.com/openview/33b33c21e29bc5d8edf7d54ca45e784b/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=2026366&diss=y

Saban, A. (2008). Metaphors about school. Educational Management in Theory and Practice, 55(55), 459-496. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kuey/issue/10342/126702

Sadoglu, G. P., & Durukan, U. G. (2018). Determining the perceptions of teacher candidates on the concepts of science course, science laboratory, science teacher and science student via metaphors. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 4(2), 436-453. https://www.ijres.net/index.php/ijres/article/view/323

Seung, E., Park, S., & Jung, J. (2015). Methodological approaches and strategies for elicited metaphor-based research. A critical review. In W. Wan & G. Low (Eds.), Elicited metaphor analysis in educational discourse (pp. 39-64). Benjamin.

Siegle, D., & McCoach, D. B. (2018). Underachievement and the gifted child. In S. I. Pfeiffer, E. Shaunessy-Dedrick, & M. Foley-Nicpon (Eds.), APA handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 559-573). American Psychological Association. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0000038-036

Sisk, D. (2009). Myth 13: The regular classroom teacher can “go it alone”. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(4), 269-271. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986209346939

Snyder, K. E., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2013). A developmental, person-centered approach to exploring multiple motivational pathways in gifted underachievement. Educational Psychologist, 48(4), 209-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.835597

Soares, L. (2016). Sciencing: Creative, scientific learning in the constructivist classroom. In M. K. Demetrikopoulos & J. L. Pecore (Eds.), Interplay of Creativity and Giftedness in Science (pp. 127-151). Brill Sense.

Sternberg, R. J. (2008). Interdisciplinary Problem-Based Learning: An Alternative to Traditional Majors and Minors. Liberal Education, 94(1), 12-17.

Stroet, K., Opdenakker, M. C., & Minnaert, A. (2015). What motivates early adolescents for school? A longitudinal analysis of associations between observed teaching and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 129-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.06.002

Şenel, T., & Aslan, O. (2014). Metaphorical perceptions of preschool teachers towards science and scientist candidates. Journal of Mersin University Faculty of Education, 10(2), 77-95. https://search.trdizin.gov.tr/yayin/detay/169809

Tan, M., Barbot, B., Mourgues, C., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2013). Measuring metaphors: Concreteness and similarity in metaphor comprehension and gifted identification. Educational & Child Psychology, 30(2), 89-100. https://shop.bps.org.uk/educational-child-psychology-vol-30-no-2-june-2013-giftedness-in-education

Tardif, T. Z., & Sternberg, R. J. (1988). What do we know about creativity? In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives (pp. 429-440). Cambridge University Press.

Taylor, C., & Dewsbury, B. M. (2018). On the problem and promise of metaphor use in science and science communication. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1538

Thomas, G., & McRobbie, C. (2013). Eliciting metacognitive experiences and reflection in a year 11 chemistry classroom: an activity theory perspective. Journal of Scientific Educational Technology, 22, 300-313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9394-8

Thomson, R., & Holland, J. (2015). Critical moments? The importance of timing in young people’s narratives of transition. In J. Wyn & H. Cahill (Eds.), Handbook of Children and Youth Studies (pp. 723-733). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4451-15-4_35

Ugulu, I. (2020). Gifted students’ attitudes towards science. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 28(1-3), 7-14. https://doi.org/10.31901/24566322.2020/28.1-3.1088

Uyaroğlu, B. (2011). Üstün yetenekli ve normal gelişim gösteren ilköğretim öğrencilerinin empati becerileri ve duygusal zeka düzeyleri ile anne-baba tutumlari arasindaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [Analysing The Relation Between The Empathy Skills, Emotional Intelligence Level And Parent Attitude Of Gifted And Normally Developed Primary School Students] [Master’s thesis, Hacettepe University, Turkey]. http://nek.istanbul.edu.tr:4444/ekos/TEZ/49558.pdf

Uzun, A. (2006). Üstün veya özel yetenekli öğrencilerin sosyal bilgiler dersine ilişkin tutumlari ile akademik başarilari arasindaki ilişki [The relationship between the attitudes of gifted and talented students towards the social studies course and their academic achievement] [Doctoral dissertation, Dokuz Eylül University, Turkey]. http://acikerisim.deu.edu.tr:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/20.500.12397/7504/188921.pdf?sequence=1

Watters, J. J., & Diezmann, C. M. (2003). The gifted student in science: fulfilling potential. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 49(3), 46-53.

Wegner, E., Burkhart, C., Weinhuber, M., & Nückles, M. (2020). What metaphors of learning can (and cannot) tell us about students’ learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 80, Article 101884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101884

Wegner, E., & Nückles, M. (2015a). Knowledge acquisition or participation in communities of practice? Academics’ metaphors of teaching and learning at the university. Studies in Higher Education, 40(4), 624-643. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.842213

Wegner, E., & Nückles, M. (2015b). Training the Brain or Tending a Garden? Students’ Metaphors of Learning Predict Self-Reported Learning Patterns. Frontline Learning Research, 3(4), 95-109. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v3i4.212

Worrell, F. C., Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Dixson, D. D. (2019). Gifted students. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 551-576. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102846

Yanai, I., & Lercher, M. (2020). A hypothesis is a liability. Genome Biology, 21(1), Article 231. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-020-02133-w

Yurtkulu, A. (2019). Özel yetenekli öğrenciler ve akranlarının görsel okuryazarlık düzeyleri ve fen dersindeki görselliğe ilişkin görüşleri [Visual literacy levels of gifted students and their peers and their views on visuality in science lesson] [Master’s thesis, Sakarya University, Turkey]. https://acikerisim.sakarya.edu.tr/handle/20.500.12619/74478



► Journal Metrics

  • 8% acceptance rate
  • 3.4 (2023) CiteScore (Scopus)
  • Q2 (2023) CiteScore Best Quartile
  • 0.42 (2023) Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

EDUPIJ Statistics from Scopus

CiteScore: 3.4, view Scopus page

SCImago Journal & Country Rank

► Educational Process: International Journal is member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). 

► New issue coming soon! (Volume 13 Issue 3, 2024)