Gifted Students With Learning Disabilities
Feb 22, 2016
Gifted Students With Learning
Disabilities
Twice-Exceptional Students
Underrepresented in Gifted Programs
Frequently Struggle Unique Talents Overlooked In Danger of Dropping Out
Primarily Three Categories
Students enrolled in a Gifted Program but not identified with a learning disability
Students already receiving Special Education services, but not indentified as gifted
Students who neither demonstrate gifted qualities nor extreme learning difficulties
Affective Characteristics
Poor Social Skills Lack of Confidence Awkward With Peers Low Self-Esteem Over Sensitive to
Failure
Varied Behavioral Characteristics
Manifest High Frustration Lack of Motivation Intense Perfectionism Extreme Carelessness Appear Lazy, Disorganized
Oversensitive
Academic Characteristics Crave But Lack Ability to Access
Advanced Information Imaginative Ideas Surpass Abilities Struggle With Self-Regulation and
Organization
Academics Persistent Difficulties
Reading Writing Math Listening Organization
Often Placed in Strategic or Intensive Reading Groups
Affective Needs Understand Strengths and
Weaknesses Need to Feel Successful
Talents & Abilities
Talents and abilities frequently concealed
Difficulties Masked because students compensate
Learning styles may differ Need Differentiated and Engaging
Curriculum
Teachers Role Help students make
connections between Known and Unknown
Build Upon Strengths While Accommodating for Weaknesses
Consider students’ potential
StrategiesDetermine Prior
Knowledge Pre-Assessments Informal Assessments Interest Inventories Discussion
Strategies-Accommodations
Provide Scaffolding Blooms Taxonomy Prior Knowledge
Graphic Organizers As Reference Tools
Webs Flow Charts Visual Aids
Supportive Strategies Self-regulation for focus and attention Collaboration With Peers Work in Areas of Interest
LD Identification Often use Discrepancy Formula
to Determine Disability Discrepancy Formula May Cause
students to be Unidentified because Struggles are concealed
Gifted Identification Intelligence Tests
Verbal Non-Verbal
Qualitative Information Checklists Interviews Observations Work Samples
Early Identification Advantage of Early Identification -
Learn to Balance Strengths and Weaknesses While Young
Cognitive Processing Disabilities May Not Manifest Themselves Until Children are Older
Lessons from History History Bares Witness of Eminent
Individuals Not Recognized Until Older
Teachers Should Consider Latent Potential Students Possess
Tiered Instruction Response to Intervention
Provides Framework for Intervention Evidence for Special Education Referral
Strengths Based Serves to Address Need for Extra
Support Recognition of Gifted Abilities
Flexible Tiers According to interest According to strength
Dichotomous Learners
Authentic and Purposeful Understand Extraordinary Characteristics High Quality Instruction Cultivate Creative and Academic Potential Need Collaborative Efforts Among
Instructors
References Baum, S. W., Cooper, C.R., Neu, T.W. (2001). Dual differentiation: An
approach for meeting the curricular needs of gifted students with learning disabilities. Psychology In The Schools, 38(5), 477.
Bianco, M. (2005). The effects of disability labels on special education and general education teachers’ referrals for gifted programs. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(4), 285-293.
Bianco, M. (2010). Strength-Based RTI: Conceptualizing a multi-tiered system for developing gifted potential. Theory Into Practice, 49(4), 323-330. doi: 10.1080/00405841.2010. 510763
Castellano, J. A. (2003). Special populations in gifted education: Working with diverse gifted learners. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Coleman, M.R. (2005). Academic strategies that work for gifted students with learning disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(1), 28-32. Retrieved from: http://search.ebscohost.com.libproxy.troy.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=tfh&AN=183489&site=ehost-live
References Coleman, M. R. Hughes, C.E. (2009). Meeting the needs of gifted
students within an RtI framework. Gifted Child Today, 32(3), 14-19. Retrieved from: http://search.ebscohost. com.libproxy.troy.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=tfh&AN=43381493&site=ehost-live
Hughes, C.E., Rollins, K., Johnsen, S.K, Pereles, D.A., Omdal, S., Baldwin, L., Brown, E.F., Abernethy, S.H., (2009). Remaining challenges for the use of RtI with gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 32(3), 58-61. Retrieved from: http://search.ebscohost.com.libproxy.troy.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=tfh&AN=4331498&site=ehost-live
Jarvis, J. M. (2009). Planning to unmask potential through responsive curriculum: The “Famous Five” exercise. Roeper Review, 31(4), 234-241. doi:10.1080/02783190903177606
McKenzie, R. G. (2010). The insufficiency of response to intervention in identifying gifted students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice Blackwell Publishing Limited, 25(3), 161-168. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5826.2010.00312.x
References Olenchak, F. (1999). Affective development of gifted students with
nontraditional talents. Roeper Review, 21(4), 293. Retrieved from: http://search.ebscohost.com.libproxy.troy.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=tfh&AN=2002308&site=ehost-live
Pierce, R.L. Adams, C. M. (2004). Tiered lessons. Gifted Child Today, 27(2), 58-65. Retrieved from: http://search.ebscohost.com.libproxy.troy.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=tfh&AN =12903326&site=ehost-live
Ruban, L. M., Reis, S.M. (2005). Identification and assessment of gifted students with learning disabilities. Theory Into Practice, 44(2), 115-124. Doi: 10.1207/s15430421 tip4402_6
Shealey, M. (2007). Creating culturally responsive literacy programs in inclusive classrooms. Intervention In School & Clinic, 42(4), 195-197.
Sobel, D. V. (2006). Blueprint for the responsive classroom. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(5), 28-35.
Tyner, M. (2013). Second grade child-find discussions with Emily Ammons, 2nd Grade Teacher.