In an era of rapidly spreading generative artificial intelligence (AI), the production, circulation, and processing of knowledge are moving beyond the monopoly of the human mind and becoming a human–machine partnership. For centuries, producing, circulating, and learning knowledge was the privilege of the human mind; generative AI systems are turning this privilege into a shared domain. Machines that write texts, solve problems, ask questions, and generate explanations are now ordinary features of classrooms, libraries, and research laboratories. Education systems, however, are being shaped not only by a technological and cognitive transformation but also by the understanding of curricula as a global product, by international comparative assessments such as PISA, and by an increasingly commercialized global education market. This article critically examines the benefits and harms of imposed global standards, the influence of PISA on Turkish curricula, and the implications of international curriculum transfer and education trade for stakeholders. In an age when algorithmic work is delegated to machines, it foregrounds epistemic autonomy, metacognitive awareness, and adaptive curricula as the focus of a humane education.

This exploratory longitudinal multi-case study examines individual changes in number sense performance and strategy use across the transition from preschool to first-grade. The participants were seven students who had been assessed using the Number Sense Skills Scale (NSSS) during preschool and were reassessed with the same instrument approximately one year later, at the end of first grade. The study examined both response accuracy and the strategies underlying students’ responses, with particular attention to number sense-based reasoning, rule-procedure-based approaches, and non-number sense responses. Quantitative analyses included descriptive statistics and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, while students’ responses and explanations were analyzed qualitatively according to response accuracy and strategy type. The median NSSS score increased from 12 (IQR = 3) at the preschool assessment to 14 (IQR = 6) at the first-grade assessment; however, the median individual difference score was -1, and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicated no statistically significant difference between scores at the two assessment occasions (Z = -0.170, p = .813; r = .064). Item-level analysis revealed heterogeneous patterns of strategy continuity and change across students. Some students maintained number-sense-based strategies, whereas others shifted between number-sense-based and rule-procedure-based approaches. Importantly, changes in response accuracy did not always correspond to changes in strategy type, highlighting the value of examining how children reason rather than relying on correctness alone. These findings should be interpreted cautiously because the assessment modalities differed across occasions: preschool items were read aloud by the researcher, whereas first-grade students independently read and responded to the items. Therefore, the observed changes cannot be attributed to literacy acquisition, formal mathematics instruction, or Philosophy for Children (P4C) participation alone. The findings provide exploratory, hypothesis-generating evidence that number sense development across the preschool to first-grade transition may involve heterogeneous individual trajectories and that assessment conditions should be considered when interpreting longitudinal changes in young children’s mathematical reasoning.

This study presents a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of research on mathematics education for gifted students published between 1986 and 2025 in the Web of Science database. A total of 153 peer-reviewed journal articles were examined using VOSviewer to identify publication trends, citation impact, leading authors, institutions, countries, and conceptual orientations. Findings reveal that the field, once marginal, expanded significantly after the mid-2000s and gained strong international visibility from 2015 onward. The United States leads the country-level analysis in publication output and citations, while South Korea shows substantial bibliographic linkages. Keyword and abstract analyses highlight connections between mathematics, assessment, curriculum design, policy, and student-centered learning. By mapping the intellectual structure and historical development of the field, this study provides a benchmark for future comparative and interdisciplinary research on educating mathematically gifted learners.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the 9th-grade mathematics curriculum developed within the framework of the 2024 Türkiye Century Education Model according to Eisner’s Educational Criticism Model. In line with the purpose of the study, the phenomenon under investigation was examined in depth and within its real-life context. In this context, the study was conducted using a case study methodology. As for the pattern, a nested singleton pattern has been used. Since data were collected from two different units of analysis within a single case, an embedded single-case design was employed. The study group consisted of 20 mathematics teachers and 10 mathematics education experts selected through criterion sampling. Data were collected using semi-structured interview forms developed separately for teachers and experts by the researchers. The data were analyzed using content analysis. The findings revealed that both teachers and experts perceived the 9th-grade mathematics curriculum as being grounded in a contemporary, student-centered, and constructivist educational perspective. The curriculum’s emphasis on fostering mathematical literacy, problem-solving, reasoning, and higher-order thinking skills was identified as one of its major strengths. However, several contextual factors, including students’ prior knowledge and readiness levels, differences among school types, large class sizes, limited instructional time, and the centralized examination system, were reported as challenges that may hinder the effective implementation of the curriculum.

This qualitative single-case study examined, based on students’ accounts, how active learning activities integrated into the eighth-grade English as a Foreign Language (EFL) curriculum provided opportunities for analytical thinking and how students experienced these activities. The study was conducted in a public middle school in Türkiye over a six-week period. Curriculum-aligned activities included simulated telephone conversations, dialogue construction, prediction tasks, and collaborative discussions, guided by four active learning dimensions: collaborative learning, active engagement, reflective discussion, and student-centered expression. Data were collected through reflective journals from 25 students and semi-structured interviews with 12 volunteers. Thematic analysis combined a deductive approach to analytical thinking processes with an inductive approach to students’ experiences. Findings indicated opportunities for strategic thinking and problem-solving through adapting explanations, inference-making through contextual and visual clues, and comparison through evaluating alternative expressions and dialogues. Students reported benefits from contextual support, peer interaction, and simulated activities, alongside difficulties interpreting unfamiliar language, uncertainty about their responses, limited individual thinking time, and constraints on self-expression. By examining analytical thinking opportunities alongside students’ cognitive and affective experiences, the study illustrates how existing EFL curriculum activities can provide opportunities for analytical engagement while highlighting the importance of instructional support and conditions for participation. This offers a context-sensitive understanding of both the opportunities and limitations of integrating analytical thinking opportunities into regular EFL curriculum.

The rapid expansion of artificial intelligence (AI), particularly generative AI, has produced a fragmented literature on how teachers use these technologies in professional practice. This qualitative metasynthesis examined how in-service teachers in Türkiye experience and negotiate AI-supported pedagogical work. National database and repository searches were supplemented by international and targeted retrieval, yielding 43 studies involving 904 in-service teachers. Thematic synthesis generated six descriptive themes and four higher-order analytical themes. Teachers reported that AI supported planning, materials development, differentiation, assessment, access to information, and professional learning, although these benefits remained dependent on professional judgement. Perceived efficiency gains were accompanied by new demands for verification, adaptation, and learning, as well as concerns about accuracy, cognitive dependence, academic integrity, privacy, equity, and human relationships. Teacher agency was reconfigured through selective pedagogical mediation involving selection, verification, adaptation, and boundary-setting. Responsible integration also depended on ecosystem capacity, including professional learning, infrastructure, governance, ethical safeguards, and equitable access. The synthesis conceptualizes the teacher–AI relationship as a conditional pedagogical partnership in which AI broadens pedagogical possibilities while educational legitimacy remains dependent on human judgement and supportive institutional conditions.

This study examined how individualized education programs (IEPs) are developed in Türkiye. It explored the views of special education teachers and academics on the IEP development process and on related pre-service courses. It also compared these views with a limited classroom observation and with the quality of four teacher-developed IEPs. A holistic single-case design was used. Participants were 10 special education teachers in Isparta and 4 academics who teach undergraduate courses related to IEPs. They were selected through criterion sampling. Data came from standardized open-ended interviews, three lesson hours of observation with one teacher and document analysis. Four IEPs were scored with the IEP Quality Assessment Scale. Interview and observation data were analyzed through content analysis. Academics reported that IEP and assessment courses remain largely theoretical. They also noted the use of ready-made IEPs and weak teamwork in schools. Teachers said they valued goal setting, communication with stakeholders and family involvement. However, these reported practices were not fully reflected in the IEPs examined. IEP scores ranged from 9 to 26 out of 32. Conditions, generalization, timelines, methods and support services were often missing. In the observed lessons, the teacher also carried out the process largely alone. Within the limits of these data, this gap between reported and documented practice points to a need for more practice-based pre-service courses and on-the-job coaching for teachers.