Research article | Open Access
Journal of Innovative Research in Teacher Education 2026, Vol. 7(2) 36-48
Exploring gifted students’ views on the effects of artificial intelligence through Taba’s data interpretation technique
pp. 36 - 48
Publish Date: September 30, 2026 | Single/Total View: 0/0 | Single/Total Download: 0/0
Abstract
This study examined gifted students’ views on the effects of artificial intelligence within Taba’s Data Interpretation Technique. The study also identified the types of questions students posed to AI during this process. The study employed an exploratory single-case design. The study included 27 middle school students enrolled in an after-school gifted education program in Türkiye. During a lesson structured around Taba’s Data Interpretation Technique, the students discussed the major effects of artificial intelligence and, in the final stages of the technique, asked ChatGPT questions to support and extend their reasoning. The data were analyzed using content analysis. The findings indicated that the gifted students generally evaluated artificial intelligence positively, emphasizing benefits such as increased efficiency, objectivity, and access to information. However, they also identified potential adverse effects, including reduced motivation and excessive dependence on AI. The questions addressed to ChatGPT predominantly consisted of information-seeking questions, including “why,” and “how” questions. Students used ChatGPT to seek explanations and information related to the educational effects they selected. The findings show how ChatGPT can be integrated into a structured instructional process that gives gifted students opportunities to engage in inquiry and reflective thinking. The study thereby contributes a practice-based example to the emerging literature on artificial intelligence in gifted education.
Keywords: Artificial intelligence in education, ChatGPT, Gifted education, Taba’s data interpretation technique, Yapay Zekanın Etkileri
APA 7th edition
Dingec, S.D., Ugur, S., & Serpil, H. (2026). Exploring gifted students’ views on the effects of artificial intelligence through Taba’s data interpretation technique. Journal of Innovative Research in Teacher Education, 7(2), 36-48.
Harvard
Dingec, S., Ugur, S. and Serpil, H. (2026). Exploring gifted students’ views on the effects of artificial intelligence through Taba’s data interpretation technique. Journal of Innovative Research in Teacher Education, 7(2), pp. 36-48.
Chicago 16th edition
Dingec, Sule Demirel, Serap Ugur and Harun Serpil (2026). "Exploring gifted students’ views on the effects of artificial intelligence through Taba’s data interpretation technique". Journal of Innovative Research in Teacher Education 7 (2):36-48.
Abu Owda, M. F., Abu Mousa, A. H., Shakfa, M. D., & Al-Hidabi, D. A. (2023). The impact of teaching artificial intelligence concepts and tools in improving creative thinking skills among talented students. In M. Al Mubarak & A. Hamdan (Eds.), Technological sustainability and business competitive advantage (pp. 267–279). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35525-7_16
Al-Otaibi, A. B., Al-Taher, E., Alduraywish, A., Alkaddadat, S., & Alarfaj, A. (2023). Designing an adaptive environment based on artificial intelligence applications to develop the gifted students’ digital skills: A proposed perception in light of reality and needs. Journal of Namibian Studies: History Politics Culture, 33, 5616–5650. https://namibian-studies.com/index.php/JNS/article/view/1835/1300
Ayeni, O. O., Al Hamad, N. M., Chisom, O. N., Osawaru, B., & Adewusi, O. E. (2024). AI in education: A review of personalized learning and educational technology. GSC Advanced Research and Reviews, 18(2), 261–271. https://doi.org/10.30574/gscarr.2024.18.2.0062
Aydın, M., & Yurdugül, H. (2024). Developing a curriculum framework of artificial intelligence teaching for gifted students. Kastamonu Education Journal, 32(1), 14–37. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.1426429
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.) Pearson Education.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Demirel Dingeç, Ş., Güçyeter, Ş., & Kirişçi, N. (2023). Views of graduate students in gifted education on Hilda Taba strategies. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 13(2), 315–329. https://doi.org/10.53478/yuksekogretim.1311567
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284363
Nah, F. F.-H., Zheng, R., Cai, J., Siau, K., & Chen, L. (2023). Generative AI and ChatGPT: Applications, challenges, and AI-human collaboration. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 25(3), 277–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228053.2023.2233814
Gagné, F. (2021). Differentiating giftedness from talent: The DMGT perspective on talent development. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003088790
Görgülü, D., & Törün, E. (2025). Türkiye'deki yetenekli öğrencilerin yapay zeka algısı üzerine bir vaka çalışması. [A case study on gifted students' perception of artificial intelligence in Türkiye.] Dijital Eğitim Teknolojisi Dergisi, 5(1), ep2502. https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/15809
Hall, W. C., & Myers, C. B. (1977). The effect of a training program in the Taba teaching strategies on teaching methods and teacher perceptions of their teaching. Peabody Journal of Education, 54(3), 162–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/01619567709538125
Hanninen, G. E. (1989). The effects of the Hilda Taba teaching strategies on critical and creative thinking (Order No. 8918535). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (303704611). https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/effects-hilda-taba-teaching-strategies-on/docview/303704611/se-2
Harry, A., & Sayudin, S. (2023). Role of AI in education. Interdisciplinary Journal and Humanity (INJURITY), 2(3), 260–268. https://doi.org/10.58631/injurity.v2i3.52
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education. Global education futures. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
Hussain, M. A., Akhtar, N., Kiran, S., & Noreen, M. (2024). Role of artificial intelligence in education. International Journal of Social Science & Entrepreneurship, 4(3), 148–164. https://doi.org/10.58661/ijsse.v4i3.306
Kaswan, K. S., Dhatterwal, J. S., & Ojha, R. P. (2024). AI in personalized learning. In A. Garg, B. V. Babu, & V. E. Balas (Eds.), Advances in technological innovations in higher education (pp. 103–117). CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003376699-9
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
Maker, C. J., & Schiever, S. W. (2010). Curriculum development and teaching strategies for gifted learners (3rd ed.). PRO-ED.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.
Nicholas, M., Skourdoumbis, A., & Bradbury, O. (2024). Meeting the needs and potentials of high-ability, high-performing, and gifted students via differentiation. Gifted Child Quarterly, 68(2), 154–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862231222225
Olpak, T., & Korkut, A. E. (2025). Özel yetenekli öğrencilerin günlük yaşamda eleştirel düşünme becerilerinin incelenmesi. Journal of Emerging Educational Studies, 2(2), 50–66. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18075227
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. (2023). ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education? Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 342–363. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9
Schiever, S. (1991). A comprehensive approach to teaching thinking. Allyn and Bacon.
Shah, P. (2023). AI and the future of education: Teaching in the age of artificial intelligence. John Wiley & Sons.
Siegle, D. (2023). A role for ChatGPT and AI in gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 46(3), 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175231168443
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE Publications.
Sugiarti, R., Erlangga, E., & Pinem, A. P. R. (2024). Technological innovation in the exploration of 5.0 education-based self esteem-exceed model on gifted intelligent students. Evolutionary Studies in Imaginative Culture, 8(2), 1214–1226.
Taba, H. (1966). Teaching strategies and cognitive functioning in elementary school children. Cooperative Research Project No. 2404. San Francisco State College.
Uzun, E. N. (2006). Türkçenin öğretimi için soru tümcesi türleri üzerine bir sınıflama denemesi. [A classification essay on types of question sentences for teaching Turkish]. Dil Dergisi, (131), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1501/dilder_0000000051
Van der Vorst, T., & Jelicic, N. (2019, June 16–19). Artificial intelligence in education: Can AI bring the full potential of personalized learning to education? 30th European Conference of the International Telecommunications Society (ITS): Towards a Connected and Automated Society. https://hdl.handle.net/10419/205222
Wang, Y. (2021). When artificial intelligence meets educational leaders’ data-informed decision-making: A cautionary tale. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 69, 100872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100872
Wollny, S., Schneider, J., Di Mitri, D., Weidlich, J., Rittberger, M., & Drachsler, H. (2021). Are we there yet? A systematic literature review on chatbots in education. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 4, 654924. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2021.654924
Yılmaz-Bursa, G. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence and preschool education activities: ethical, pedagogical, and applied approaches. Journal of Innovative Research in Teacher Education, 6(2), 91-102. https://doi.org/10.29329/jirte.2025.1341.4
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
