Developing Futures Thinking Literacy Among Middle School Gifted and Regular Students

References

• Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Bada, S. O., & Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 66–70.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, A., Ennis, C. D., Martin, R., & Sun, H. (2006). Situational interest: A curriculum component enhancing motivation to learn. New Developments in Learning Research, 235–261.
   Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Play and intrinsic rewards. In M. Csikszentmihalyi (Ed.), Flow and the foundations of positive psychology (pp. 135–153). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Csikszentmihalyi, M., Abuhamdeh, S., & Nakamura, J. (2014). Flow. In M. Csikszentmihalyi (Ed.), Flow and the foundations of positive psychology (pp. 227–238). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J. (2001). The collaboration of mathematically gifted students on challenging tasks. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 25(1), 7–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320102500102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2014). An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 12, 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2013.12.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• French, L. R., Walker, C. L., & Shore, B. M. (2011). Do gifted students really prefer to work alone? Roeper Review, 33(3), 145–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2011.580497
   Google Scholar
• Future Problem-Solving Program. (2001). Future problem-solving program coach’s handbook.
   Google Scholar
• Gindi, S., Kohan-Mass, J., & Pilpel, A. (2019). Gender differences in competition among the gifted: The role of single-sex classrooms vs. co-ed classrooms. Roeper Review, 41(3), 199–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2019.1622163
   Google Scholar
• Gottfried, A. E., & Gottfried, A. W. (1996). A longitudinal study of academic intrinsic motivation in intellectually gifted children: Childhood through early adolescence. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40(4), 179–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698629604000402
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graesser, A. C., Foltz, P. W., Rosen, Y., Shaffer, D. W., Forsyth, C., & Germany, M. L. (2018). Challenges of assessing collaborative problem solving. In E. Care, P. Griffin, & M. Wilson (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Research applications (pp. 75–91). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Gross, M. U. M. (2015). Characteristics of able gifted, highly gifted, exceptionally gifted, and profoundly gifted learners. In H. E. Vidergor & C. R. Harris (Eds.), Applied practice for educators of gifted and able learners (pp. 199–214). Sense.
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hava, K., Guyer, T., & Cakir, H. (2020). Gifted students’ learning experiences in systematic game development process in after-school activities. Educational Technology Research & Development, 68(3), 1439–1459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09750-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Israeli Ministry of Education. (2014). Something good is happening now: Stepping-stones for meaningful learning. Author. (Hebrew)
   Google Scholar
• Israeli Ministry of Education, Division for Gifted and Outstanding Students. (2023). Programs for gifted and talented students. Author. (Hebrew)
   Google Scholar
• Jones, A., Buntting, C., Hipkins, R., McKim, A., Conner, L., & Saunders, K. (2012). Developing students’ futures thinking in science education. Research in Science Education, 42(4), 687–708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9214-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanevsky, L. (2011). Deferential differentiation: What types of differentiation do students want? Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(4), 279–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986211422098
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan Sayı, A., & Yurtseven, N. (2022). How do gifted students learn? Their learning styles and dispositions towards learning. Education, 50(8), 3–13, 1031–1045. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2021.1929380
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 27–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.518645
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazic, B., Knežević, J., & Maričić, S. (2021). The influence of project-based learning on student achievement in elementary mathematics education. South African Journal of Education, 41(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v41n3a1909
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makkonen, T., Tirri, K., & Lavonen, J. (2021). Engagement in learning physics through project-based learning: A case study of gifted Finnish upper-secondary-level students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 32(4), 501–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X211018644
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mellecker, R. R., Witherspoon, L., & Watterson, T. (2013). Active learning: Educational experiences enhanced through technology-driven active game play. The Journal of Educational Research, 106(5), 352–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2012.736429
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, R. (2007). Futures literacy: A hybrid strategic scenario method. Futures, 39(4), 341–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2006.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, R. (2018). Transforming the future: Anticipation in the 21st century. UNESCO Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, R., Poli, R., & Rossel, P. (2018). The discipline of anticipation: Foundations for futures literacy 1. In R. Miller (Ed.), Transforming the future (pp. 51–65). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Morgenstein, O., Pinto, I., & Asher, T. (2016). Policy outline for research and development of future span pedagogy: Trends, challenges, principles, and recommendations. Israeli Ministry of Education, Pedagogical Administration. (Hebrew)
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2011). Assessing 21st century skills. National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Olszewski-Kubilius, P. M., Kulieke, M. J., & Krasney, N. (1988). Personality dimensions of gifted adolescents: A review of the empirical literature. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32(4), 347–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698628803200403
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2015). Pisa 2015 collaborative problem-solving framework [Draft]. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/Draft%20PISA%202015%20Collaborative%20Problem%20Solving%20Framework%20.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Partovi, T., & Razavi, M. R. (2019). The effect of game-based learning on academic achievement motivation of elementary school students. Learning and Motivation, 68, 101592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2019.101592
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Passig, D. (1995). To teach and learn the future: Futuristic educational and training systems. Bar-Ilan University.
   Google Scholar
• Passig, D. (2001). To study and to teach the future. Journal of Jewish Education, 66(3), 41–50. Hebrew. https://doi.org/10.1080/00216240091028519
   Google Scholar
• Passig, D. (2004). Future time span as a cognitive skill in future studies. Futures Research Quarterly, 19(4), 27–47.
   Google Scholar
• Passig, D. (2013). Forcognito: The future mind. Mishkal-Yediot Ahronot Books and Hemed Books. (Hebrew)
   Google Scholar
• Phillips, N., & Lindsay, G. (2006). Motivation in gifted students. High Ability Studies, 17(1), 57–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598130600947119
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piaget, J. (1964). Part I: Cognitive development in children: Piaget development and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2(3), 176–186. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660020306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ritchhart, R., & Perkins, D. (2008). Teaching students to think: Making thinking visible. Educational Leadership, 65(5), 57–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roni, S. M., Merga, M. K., & Morris, J. E. (2020). Conducting quantitative research in education. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Sabirli, Z. E., & Coklar, A. N. (2020). The effect of educational digital games on education, motivation and attitudes of elementary school students against course access. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 12(4), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.18844/wjet.v12i3.4993
   Google Scholar
• Sailer, M., & Homner, L. (2020). The gamification of learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32(1), 77–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09498-w
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savery, J. R. (2015). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. In A. Walker, H. Leary, C. E. Hemlo-Silver, & P. A. Ertmer (Eds.), Essential readings in problem-based learning: Exploring and extending the legacy of Howard S. Barrows (pp. 5–15). Purdue University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schunk, D. H. (2008). Metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning: Research recommendations. Educational Psychology Review, 20(4), 463–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9086-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Segal, J. W., Chipman, S. F., & Glaser, R. (2014). Thinking and learning skills: Vol. 1. Relating instruction to research. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Shumow, L., & Schmidt, J. A. (2014). Parent engagement in science with ninth graders and with students in higher grades. School Community Journal, 24(1), 17–36.
   Google Scholar
• Strati, A. D., Schmidt, J. A., & Maier, K. S. (2017). Perceived challenge, teacher support, and teacher obstruction as predictors of student engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(1), 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sung, H. Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students’ learning performance in science courses. Computers & Education, 63, 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomlinson, C. A. (2009). The parallel curriculum model: A design to develop potential and challenge high-ability learners. In J. S. Renzulli, E. J. Gubbins, K. S. McMillen, R. D. Eckert, & C. A. Little (Eds.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (2nd ed., pp. 571–598). Creative Learning Press.
   Google Scholar
• Van Tassel-Baska, J., & Little, C. (Eds.). (2011). Content based curriculum for high ability learners. Prufrock Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vidergor, H. E. (2010). The Multidimensional Curriculum Model (MdCM). Gifted and Talented International, 25(2), 153–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2010.11673579
   Google Scholar
• Vidergor, H. E. (2015). The multidimensional curriculum model. In H. E. Vidergor & C. R. Harris (Eds.), Applied practice for educators of gifted and able learners (pp. 199–214). Sense.
   Google Scholar
• Vidergor, H. E. (2017). Effectiveness of the multidimensional curriculum model on the development of high order thinking skills among elementary and secondary school students. The Curriculum Journal, 29(1), 95–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2017.1318771
   Google Scholar
• Vidergor, H. E. (2018). The multidimensional curriculum enhancing future thinking literacy: Teaching learners to take control of their future. Brill-Sense.
   Google Scholar
• Vidergor, H. E. (2021). Effects of digital escape room on gameful experience, collaboration, and motivation of elementary school students. Computers and Education, 166, 104156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vidergor, H. E. (2023a). Teachers of gifted students: Teaching knowledge of HOTS, technological pedagogical content knowledge and self-efficacy. Multi Colors, 3(2), 17–34.
   Google Scholar
• Vidergor, H. E. (2023b). Teaching futures thinking literacy and futures studies in schools. Futures, 146, 103083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.103083
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vidergor, H. E., Givon, M., & Mendel, E. (2019). Promoting future thinking in elementary and middle school applying the multidimensional curriculum model. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 31(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.10.001
   Google Scholar
• Wertsch, J. V. (1997). Vygotsky and the social formation of the mind. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, G., & Goodwin, P. (1999). Future‐focused thinking: Combining scenario planning with decision analysis. Journal of Multi‐Criteria Decision Analysis, 8(6), 311–321. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1360(199911)8:6<311:AID-MCDA256>3.0.CO;2-T
   Google Scholar