Twice Exceptional: Teaching Gifted Students with Learning Disabilities in the Regular Classroom

by Janet Bourne

Everyone in the school knows what I can't do, absolutely no one knows what I can do!
(A young middle-schooler, quoted in Baum, Cooper & Neu, 2001, p. 488)

Abstract

Gifted students who have difficulties with reading, handwriting, spelling, mathematics or organisation, often appear to be doubly disadvantaged during their school years. The learning problems are usually physical, cognitive or behavioural in nature, and can cause students to become frustrated as teachers try to remediate the weaknesses, allowing few opportunities for their talents to surface. This can leave a child feeling confused, isolated and sometimes at risk. Writers have often described gifted students with learning disabilities (GLD) as a paradox in terms, because of the discrepancies between these students' strengths and weaknesses. An astute teacher will often accurately identify the discrepancy between one area and another, but not know what to do about it. There are however educational interventions to meet the needs of GLD students that can be implemented by the regular classroom teacher. A case study of one student identified as having 'dyspraxia' is used as an illustration.

Definition

GLD students are sometimes referred to as 'twice exceptional'. McCoach, Kehle, Bray and Siegle (2001) describe GLD students as those 'of superior intellectual ability who exhibit a significant discrepancy in their level of performance in a particular academic area such as reading, mathematics, spelling or written expression' (p 405). Rizza and McIntosh (2001) suggest that, 'twice exceptional refers to students who are gifted and who have been identified with a learning disability' (p 401).

Background Context

School proved to be a challenging place for Jack. From his early entry, his parents believed that he knew much more than what he was able to demonstrate to successive classroom teachers. The first warning bells sounded when Jack, aged five, 'read' a Level 9 story to his mother after being introduced to it earlier that day. The problem was when he 'read' the story Jack hadn't even opened the book. His photographic memory had allowed him to remember it perfectly!

In class when Jack was able to talk about what he knew and teachers often remarked that he seemed very bright. His need for constant activity appeared to interfere with his ability to achieve in written tasks. He had difficulty putting his ideas on paper and over time the gaps between Jack's written work and that of his classmates began to widen. This seemed most apparent in spelling and writing - where his ideas always raced ahead of his ability to write them down, leading to great frustration for him. A pattern of incomplete tasks developed and continued until Jack was in his fourth year at school, at which stage his attitude to school began to deteriorate, which in turn began to affect his behaviour. In desperation his parents sought advice from a psychologist.

Identification

Recognition of learning disabilities among the gifted can be extraordinarily difficult because of the individual's ability to compensate (i.e. the ability to solve problems in alternative ways) (Silverman, 1999). Identification of GLD students is a complex task and researchers agree that a multi-identification approach is essential (e.g., McCoach, Kehle, Bray & Siegle, 2001; Sturgess, 2004). It was the psychologist who diagnosed Jack as having dyspraxia. According to the Australian Dyspraxia Support Group ìDevelopmental dyspraxia is a neurologically based disorder, a motor planning difficulty present from birth. It is believed to be an immaturity of parts of the motor cortex (area of the brain) that prevents messages from being properly transmitted to the bodyî. Dyspraxia affects each child in different ways and to different degrees. It is inconsistent and may affect the child one day but not the next. Children with dyspraxia often have great difficulty with drawing shapes, writing numbers or words, or making diagrams. This inability to physically do what the child wants to can be extremely frustrating. According to The Dyspraxia Support Group of New Zealand, approximately 10% of the New Zealand population may be affected by dyspraxia.

The most obvious indication of GLD students is the discrepancy between their measured intellectual ability and their school achievement. McCoach et al. (2001) recommend that in order to accurately identify a GLD student, practitioners need to document this discrepancy. The psychologist assessed Jack's intellectual and cognitive skills using the Wechsler Intelligence Scales for Children Third Edition (WISC-III). Jack's Full Scale (122) and Performance (126) IQs place him in the superior range of intellectual functioning. The WISC III awards bonus points for speed (Kaufman, 1994) and this was a real problem for Jack. The speed constraint can cause the performance side of the test to be problematic for boys especially those with slight motor speed problems, which in turn depresses the full IQ (Morelock & Morrison, 1996). Jack's Verbal IQ was 114. Mills and Brody (1999) believe that an average score on either Verbal or Performance IQ measures, when combined with other high scores, may indicate a 'deficit' in a gifted student.

A simple and quick indication of a GLD student is significant discrepancies between Progressive Achievement Test (PAT) Listening Comprehension and Reading Comprehension scores. A difference of 20+ percentile points in favour of the former suggests that a child finds interpreting print far more difficult than interpreting oral language (Sturgess, 2001, 2004). Discrepancies between Jack's PAT results are evident over the last seven years (see Table1).

Nielsen (2002) suggests that students with learning disabilities who have IQ scores at or above 120 should be viewed as potentially twice exceptional, and that individual records of these students be examined. The higher the IQ, the more likely the student is to be asynchronous (that is the more uneven his development between one ability and another). Asynchrony is magnified when high levels of intelligence are combined with disabilities (Silverman, 1999). Hence the common belief that an IQ score above 130 identifies intellectually gifted students is inappropriate, as this would eliminate many GLD students. Jack's WISC-III results indicate that he is intellectually gifted.

Table 1. Jack's Progressive Achievement Test (PAT) Results.

Year	Listening Comp Age %ile	Reading Comp Age %ile
1998	65	29
1999	85	52
2000	71	45
2001	85	51
2002	81	67
2003	81	68
2004	81	61

Finally, Stewart's (1997) Questionnaire for the Identification of Gifted and Learning Disabled Students was completed by one classroom teacher and separately by each of Jack's parents. When this data was considered together, the discrepancy between Jack's WISCIII results and his school achievement, as measured by classroom-based assessments, strongly suggests that Jack is twice exceptional. He appears to know much more than he is capable of demonstrating through the written medium.

Little is known about GLD students in a New Zealand context but anecdotal evidence indicates that few are ever identified. To complicate matters, although the identification methods described above are well documented, there appears to be no conclusive empirically sound guidelines for identifying GLD students. Ferri, Gregg and Heggoy (1997) found that 41% of GLD students are not identified until they reach university. Mills and Brody (1999) are also concerned that many twice exceptional students are never identified during their school years, while others such as Gordon et al. (1999) report on the possibility of misdiagnosis. Hence, issues of identification can be extremely frustrating and a major source of misunderstanding for both teachers and parents, but nowhere near as frustrating as for the GLD students themselves (Coleman, 2001).

This article acknowledges that Jack is a GLD student and sets out to see what intervention strategies are achievable in a regular classroom setting.

Characteristics of GLD students

Although impossible to separate the cognitive (thinking), metacognitive (thinking about thinking) and the affective (feeling) domains, here they will be examined as separate issues.

Cognitive

Among other cognitive characteristics, Stewart (1997) refers to the following list:
Spelling: reversals in reading and writing letters, poor reading, writing and spelling skills,
Written output: untidy handwriting, difficulty getting thoughts down on paper, basic grammar, punctuation and sentence structure
Reading: obvious inconsistencies when reading aloud, such as good comprehension but poor reading skills, or vice versa Mathematics: possibly numeric transpositions

Neilsen (2002, p 97) found that ìtwice exceptional students more closely paralleled gifted students on measures of intellectual ability however, their reading and written language ability is more reflective of the group with learning disabilitiesî. Jack reversed both letters and numbers (sometimes transposing them) until the age of 10 and he continues to have poor handwriting skills. GLD students often are more advanced orally with a more extensive vocabulary than their same-age peers. However, discrepancies emerge when they are asked to produce written evidence demonstrating their ability. They hand in incomplete assignments or when they do complete the written work, it consists of simple vocabulary and spelling, that does not represent the student's full capabilities. A selection of comments from Jack's school reports support Neilsen:

1997: A confident, articular speaker who argues his case clearly and logically. Struggles to commit his ideas to paper.

1998: Jack often has great ideas he just cannot express then in written form. Unfortunately Jack's record keeping has not been up to the standard of his verbal interaction. Tasks are completed with the minimum of effort and information. When reading he has a tendency to exchange one small word for another in his race to the end of the text, but this does not affect his understanding at all. Jack's writing, although cramped and hurried and a little on the dark side, is reasonably well formed and legible. Jack knows very well what he wants to write, but would rather the pencil did it without his direction.

2004: Jack has very good listening skills, a wide vocabulary and a very good reading comprehension. This does not translate into very good writing skills. He has good ideas but finds difficulty in putting them into print.

This contradiction between potential and demonstrated ability confuses the teacher who finds the dilemma puzzling. The disparity between apparent ability, often expressed verbally, and production, particularly in written form is often attributed to lack of motivation, and interpreted by some as laziness (Sturgess, 2001). Jack's 'apparent' lack of effort in written work is a consistent theme in school reports at all levels.

Metacognitive

The metacognitive factors carry over to all facets of a GLD student's life and have been described as follows:
Organisational skills: inability to locate appropriate materials, failure to complete or hand in assignments, poor time management and concentration skills.
Memory and sequencing: anxiety in test conditions can exacerbate short term memory problems, long term memory problems, difficulties with rote memorization, sequential learning and performance under timed conditions, difficulty remembering more than three instructions at once.
Visual motor integrations: clumsiness, poor motor skills.
Visualisation: learns more easily from visual presentation and has trouble with auditory tasks.
(Stewart, 1997)

Comments from Jack's teachers reflect their awareness of his lack of organisational skills and also the discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement:
2001: Jack is a very capable reader; he does however, have difficulty presenting this information and needs to take more time planning and constructing work, organising and explaining his ideas and thoughts.
2003: Although his exam mark is low it doesn't reflect his ability to complete set tasks. As Jack did not hand in his manual with completed tasks by the end of term, he did not achieve acceptable grades.
2004: Jack's contributions to the class are interesting and insightful. Clearly he has a sound grasp of the material covered. His last test result was a disappointment.
Affective

The affective factors of giftedness are strongly influenced by teachers, parents and peers. Some commonly identified affective traits of GLD children include:
Self-concept: low self esteem, extremely high goals. Self critical when failing to reach these goals.
Socialisation problems: both within the family and school.
Impulsivity: emotions sometimes overpower reasoning, displays of behaviour associated with ADD.
Aggression: easily frustrated and disruptive.
Passivity: unable to follow directions, difficulty in settling down, severely inattentive and constantly daydreaming.
Negativity: their high intelligence is often used to negative ways such as loud expressions of boredom, attempts to divert to topics they are much more comfortable with, or downright refusal to participate in their weak areas.
(Stewart, 1997)

There are certain behavioural characteristics associated with GLD students, chief among them are the seeming inability to pay attention, sit still, or stay on task (Baum, Owen & Dixon, 1993). Jack has been described as possibly having ADHD, by two specialists and some classroom teachers:

A paediatrician's report reads:
1996: He has plenty of energy and is distractible and fidgets. From my observations today Jack does have some concentration problems. However, he falls within the grey zone of those with and those without ADHD.

The psychologist commented:
1998: There is significant difference in statistical and practical terms between Jack's Freedom from Distractibility score and all of his other ID or index scores. This score suggests strongly that Jack is very likely to have more difficulties than a great majority of is classmates in focusing, attending and concentrating in the classroom and in preventing himself from becoming distracted by sights and sounds around him; I am inclined to venture a tentative diagnosis of mild ADHD.

Some classroom teachers volunteered their own medical diagnosis or tentatively alluded to traits of distractibility:
1996: Jack is a hyperactive, intelligent child who is sincere and considerate to others. His hyperactivity probably compromises his learning potential. He is sensitive to criticism. Jack's hyperactivity can detract from his learning concentration.
1999: Jack is continually active. This makes it difficult for him to settle to ëat desk' activities.
2003: Jack is a very capable student indeed who has considerable talent in this subject. He does need to take things a little more quietly occasionally as his examination result was lower than expected.

Fortunately Jack has experienced few, if any, socialisation or self-esteem problems:
2002: Jack demonstrates enjoyment of learning and has maintained a positive attitude towards his education. He displays mature social skills and his easy-going outlook rarely sees him fazed or discouraged. He is well-liked by his peers and enjoys positive social interaction with them.

One of the most obvious general characteristics of GLD students is a negative self-image. It has been shown that GLD students feel like failures and feel less capable than learning disabled peers who have only average ability (Baum & Owen, 1988). A research investigation by Reis, McGuire and Neu (2000), undertaken to find out compensation strategies used by successful GLD University graduates, found that all participants recalled negative primary and secondary experiences in which teachers accused them of being lazy and unmotivated. Knowing this, Jack's parents have always tried hard to advocate for him. They have either requested an interview with the principal regarding Jack's placement for the following year and/or made an approach to each classroom teacher early in the school year to explain his situation. Attendance at secondary necessitated informing deans and learning support teachers of Jack's learning disability, so that this information could be passed on to all curriculum teachers. Jack's mother has had to request explicitly that this occur so that classroom teachers know Jack's difficulties, and can differentiate their programmes accordingly.

Strengths

However, all is not doom and gloom for GLD students who typically have many strengths, especially in nonverbal areas. Baum, Cooper and Neu (2001) demonstrate that these students are able to think abstractly, learn complex ideas, engage in authentic problem solving and communicate their ideas through a variety of means, just not in the traditional ways. The adage ëa picture paints a thousand words' is extremely relevant. Silverman (1997, cited in Stewart, 1997) says that 80% are strong visual spatial learners, who ìremember what they see and often forget what they hear; the trick to teaching them effectively is showing (author's emphasis) them, rather than telling themî (p 72).

Stewart (1997) lists the following cognitive, metacognitive and affective strengths of GLD students:
Cognitive

1. Oral Expression: excellent communications skills, above average vocabulary and superior abilities in class discussions.
2. Spelling: learns visually.
3. Specific aptitude: display great knowledge for a subject, wide range of interest and intellectual curiosity.
4. Mathematics: exceptional skills in mathematical reasoning, geometry and science, superb spatially, keen visual memory.
5. Computing: logic of computing suits them.
6. Creative, technological or emotional giftedness: strong artistic, musical or mechanical aptitude.

Metacognitive

1. Thinking skills and problem solving abilities: superior reasoning abilities in complex concepts, lateral thinking, abstract thinking and problem solving, ask astute questions, excellent comprehension, flexibility and fluency in generating new ideas.
2. Divergent thinkers: unusual, original, imaginative and creative thought processes.
3. Intuitive thinkers: arriving at the correct solution without writing down the basic steps taken.
4. Generate complex ideas: able to grasp complex relationships with a sophisticated sense of humour, understand satire, metaphors, analogies, appreciate adult humour.
5. Systems thinkers: take a holistic overview, comfortable with complexity, pattern seeking; thrive on complexity, learn complex systems easily but struggle with easy work.

Affective

1. Display amazing productivity and motivation: especially when their person interests are involved.
2. May work best individually.
3. Strong sense of fair play and justice.

The superior nature of Jack's verbal skills has been described earlier. There is also considerable evidence from teachers' report comments that acknowledge the existence of strong computing skills and mathematical ability, probably best summed up by the psychologist's comments:
1998: Jack's area of greatest intellectual strength (top 4% of people his age : superior level for age) is Perceptual Organisation. This area includes the skill of: spotting increasingly complex present or absent detail, assembling whole objects from parts accurately and at speed, and sequencing ideas, objects and patterns, accurately both inside the head and with the hands while under time pressure; I have suggested accessing appropriate maths resources for extending Jack in this area of real talent for him. I have met very few children like Jack, who has a real ëfeel' for the conceptual basis of maths. Jack missed selection for the top three streamed Mathematics classes upon entry to secondary school.

Teacher Influence

What are the educational implications and what can a classroom teacher realistically do? Teachers need to first of all view these students as gifted learners because GLD students are likely to be overlooked for any special provision (Mather & Roberts, 1994; in Stewart, 1997), and if they are identified few specific programmes have been developed for this particular population (Brody & Mills, 1997). Baum, Cooper and Neu (2001) have developed a differentiated curriculum for GLD students, called Project HIGH HOPES, rich in inquiry, experimentation and discovery. The students are offered strategies for addressing learning problems while simultaneously being exposed to real challenge through advanced-level content and authentic problems. The results of this integrated approach focusing on student strengths and individual talents enriched the school experiences of GLD students qualitatively and as a result the students' motivation increased.

Over the last two decades writers (such as, Maker & Udall, 1985; Nielsen, 2002; Stewart, 1997; Sturgess, 2004; Silverman, 1999; Winebrenner, 2003) have listed some suggestions for classroom teacher to experiment with for cognitive problems:

• Design curriculum that enhances different or multiple intelligences and learning styles
• Allow students to self-select projects
• Allow students opportunities to conduct in-depth exploration within interest areas
• Permit choice in selecting work areas, as sensory challenges may present a problem
• Teach content by teaching concepts first, then the details
• Teach how to set realistic short term goals and give credit in stages
• Offer a variety of pre-test opportunities to determine prior knowledge, and accelerate to more challenging content
• Tie past learning with new content using graphic organisers, charts, graphs, timelines and similar tools
• Present material in a variety of ways - visually, orally, kinaesthetically, that is not always dependent on pen and paper, or reading
• Place the student where the teacher and board can easily be seen
• Give students opportunities to share knowledge in different ways from written reports (tapes, oral tests, projects, videos, etc)
• Give realistic deadlines for completing assignments (often longer than for other students)
• Use contracts to communicate and record expectations
• Teach to the student's strengths
• Make eye contact before giving instructions
• Expose the student to abstract, complex concepts (critical and creative thinking), even if the easy sequential material hasn't been mastered
• Avoid timed tests
• Grade content: don't penalise presentation
• Let the student discover his own methods of problem solving. Do not insist that students show working out
• Use sight approach to reading rather than phonics. Use books rich in visual imagery
• Many of these students are ëwhole-part' learners - give them the big picture before the details
• Use open ended community of inquiry and open ended questioning techniques

There is no single best solution for meeting the education needs of the GLD student. Some creative experimentation with a variety of teaching strategies may be necessary, to find out what will work for a given student. One thing is clear - these students should have the choice of interest-based activities within each school day and be offered a variety of ways to present their work. They will need help from teachers to support this learning.

It is also critical to the well being of GLD children that they be identified early. Intervention strategies should be based on nurturing the student's strength, while simultaneously teaching them how to compensate for their weaknesses. Many gifted individuals from history, such as Thomas Edison, Ludwig van Beethoven, Helen Keller and Franklin D. Roosevelt, had learning problems in their early years and learned how to compensate for them. In a university LD programme undertaken by Reis, McGuire and Neu, (2000) participants all reflected on how useful it would have been if they had learned certain compensation skills or strategies earlier in their lives. With access to technology GLD students are able to produce work much more rapidly and begin to view themselves as successful learners (Baum, Cooper & Neu, 2001).

Many writers (eg., Maker & Udall, 1985; Nielsen, 2002; Silverman, 1999; Sturgesss, 2004: Winebrenner, 2003) have documented a variety of compensation strategies to teach GLD students that include:

• Teach typing and computer literacy
• Encourage the use of calculators, computers and tape recorders
• Allow students to take a test in a quiet setting
• Teach organisational techniques (colour coded notebooks, two sets of texts, etc) and problem solving strategies
• To improve handwriting, try calligraphy
• Engage a tutor to help the student learn visualisation techniques
• If the student has motor speed or processing speed difficulties, recommend a psychologist's visit so that teachers know to make allowances for the weaknesses
• Allow a reader/writer to record for the student
• Recommend a visit to a counsellor who may be able to generate strategies and solutions to combat weaknesses
• Break down assignments so that students are not overwhelmed
• Avoid excessive worksheets
• Accompany oral directions with written instructions to which students can later refer

After years of persistent failure, GLD students often lose confidence in their own ability to succeed academically (Baum, Cooper & Neu, 2001). They become frustrated and confused, which can lead to feelings of failure, depression, self-loathing and anger. Over time this situation can deteriorate until the social and emotional well-being of these students is at risk. The use of Gardner's (1983) theory of Multiple Intelligences is one way of allowing GLD students to use the other intelligences (not only the 3Rs) to demonstrate what they have learned and hence may avoid any feeling of self-doubt. Baum et al. (1995) found that success in school boosted a GLD student's self-efficacy and self-perception as a learner and once they viewed themselves as competent learners, their reading and writing also improved.

There are many interventions that are appropriate to meet the affective needs of GLD students. The following list is drawn from the recommendations of Maker and Udall, 1985, Nielsen, 2002, Silverman, 1991 and Winebrenner, 2003:

• Teach all students to appreciate individual differences and value diversity
• Reduce academic pressures as a way to lessen frustration and lack of motivation
• Use values clarification and role-playing activities
• Use games such as UNGAME to encourage students to talk
• Hold class meetings to discuss feelings and problems
• Bring successful GLD adults into the classroom to serve as role models
• Explain what it is like to be GLD
• Work toward having the GLD student learn to value himself as intelligent
• Use humour frequently
• Engage the student emotionally through encouragement
• Assure the student that he will get more successful as he gets older because most GLD students find fields in which they can succeed
• Provide an emotionally safe environment where students' ideas and feelings are accepted by teacher and peers
• Enhance and build on students' leadership skills
• Develop students' collaborative skills

Smaller than average student to teacher ratios are also recommended, as is the provision of well-trained teachers (Fall & Nolan, 1993; Hishinuma, 1993; Thomson & Watkins, 1990; all quoted in Stewart, 1997). Barriers to implementing sound practices nationwide in New Zealand appear to be similar to those in Australia where reasons such as the following seem to be prevalent: ëAnswers such as lack of teacher knowledge about the specific requirements of GLD students, large classes, exhausted teachers, heavy workloads and a reluctance to take on anything more all spring to mind' (Stewart, 1997).

Hence, it is imperative that parents become vocal advocates for their child, accentuating their child's strengths rather than their weaknesses, in order to prevent negative consequences. Too often the gifts go unrecognised, are ignored, are put on hold, or used to remediate weaknesses, rather than developed or nurtured in their own right (Baum, Owen & Dixon, 1993). Teachers need to listen to parents who have a variety of opportunities to observe their child's behaviour and hence are critical in the identification, intervention and the assessment procedures.

Recommendations for Jack

There is a delicate balance required between a student-centred approach that caters to the student's strengths and a teacher-directed programme that remediates the learning disability, which varies from one individual to another. In Jack's case, as with many GLD students, encouragement to share his vast knowledge in various ways is much more important than traditional remedial strategies. As he has matured Jack has found many strategies that work for him which include the following recommendations:

1. Minimise distractions: sit Jack up the front of the classroom.
2. Give extra time in tests or assignments due, or give tests orally.
3. Avoid pen and paper recording when practicable; encourage use of alternatives such as talks, demonstrations, taped responses, assignments done on the computer: word processor, powerpoint presentations, etc.
4. Encourage use of available technology: Franklin spellchecker, calculator, etc.
5. Make use of guest speakers, demonstrations, visits, videos and active resource-based learning: anything other than the traditional pen and paper.
6. The final product for an assignment probably needs to be talked about (Jack will know much more than he can demonstrate in writing).
7. Teach time management/organisational skills: how to organise ideas quickly. Using key words and symbols, webbing and mapping, etc.
8. Give advanced work in areas of strength: mathematics, computing and problem solving, etc.
9. Share the information with the next teacher or school, that the child is a GLD student and its implications.
10. Share this story with colleagues who teach Jack
11. Advocate, on his behalf, careful class placement for the following year.

Conclusion

As with other gifted students, GLD students need differentiated opportunities for their exceptional intellectual abilities and talents. In contrast however, when learning becomes a challenge through the student's learning difficulties, teach them compensation strategies that will increase their ability to succeed (Winebrenner, 2003) and demonstrate what they know. A regular New Zealand classroom teacher, in consultation with the twice exceptional student and their parents, has the ability to meet this challenge and provide increased quality educational opportunities. As with all teaching, a successful approach will be holistic and learner-centred, accentuating strengths and valuing interests. These students should be actively engaged in the learning process and given a choice of content, methods of recording and assessment procedures. This is simply best practice and as with other students many of the recommendations given are effective teaching practice for all. In failing to identify and provide for GLD students we are neglecting an ëinvisible' segment of the school population, one that has huge potential to contribute to society. Success in the real world does not solely depend on reading and writing only but many, many areas of skills and knowledge and expertise.

References

Baum, S., Cooper, C., & Neu, T. (2001). Dual differentiation: An approach for meeting the curricular needs of gifted students with learning disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 38(5), 477-490.
Baum, S., & Owen, S. (1988). High ability/learning disabled students: How are they different? Gifted Children Quarterly, 33, 110-114.
Baum, S., Owen, S., & Dixon, J. (1993). To be gifted and learning disabled. Highett, Victoria: Hawker Brownlow.
Brody, L., & Mills, C. (1997). Gifted Children with learning disabilities: A review of the issues. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(3), 282-296.
Coleman, M. (2001). Surviving or thriving? 21 Gifted boys with learning disabilities share their school stories. Gifted Child Today, 24(3), 56-63.
Ferri, B., Gregg, N., & Heggoy, S. (1997). Profiles of college students demonstrating learning disabilities with and without giftedness. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 552-559.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gordon, M., Lewandowski, L., & Keiser, S. (1999). The LD label for relatively well-functioning students: A critical analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32(6), 485-490.
Kaufman, A. (1994). Intelligent testing with the WISC-III. New York: John Wiley.
Maker, C. & Udall, A. (1985). Giftedness and Learning Disabilities. Retrieved November, 28, 2004, from ericec.org/digests/e427.htm
McCoach, D., Kehle, T., Bray, M., & Siegle, D. (2001).Best Practices in the identification of gifted students with learning disabilities. Psychology in the Schools, 38(5), 403-411.
Mills, C., & Brody, L. (1999). Overlooked and unchallenged: Gifted students with learning disabilities. Knowledge Quest, 27(5), 36-40.
Morelock, M., & Morrison, K. (1996). Gifted Children have talents too. Highett, Victoria: Hawker Brownlow.
Nielsen, M. (2002). Gifted students with learning disabilities: Recommendations for identification and programming. Exceptionality, 10(2), 93-111.
Reis, S., McGuire, J., & Neu, T. (2000). Compensation strategies used by high-ability students with learning disabilities who succeed in college. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44(2), 123-134.
Rizza, M. & McIntosh, D. (2001). Introduction to the special issue: New perspectives in Gifted Education. Psychology in the Schools, 38(5), 401- 402.
Silverman, L. (1999). Help for the Hidden Handicapped. Highly Gifted Children. Paper presented at 1999 Gifted Conference, Christchurch College of Education, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Stewart, W. (1997). Problems with Teachers Identifying Gifted and Learning Disabled Students. Thesis: Master of Gifted Education.
Sturgess, A. (2001). Behind the Mask: Identifying & Catering for the Hidden Academically Talented. Paper presented at Gifted and Talented Conference, North Harbour Conference Centre, Albany, New Zealand.
Sturgess, A. (2004). Celebrating the square peg. In D. McAlpine & R. Moltzen (Eds.), Gifted and talented: New Zealand perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 401:424). Palmerston North: Kanuka Grove Press.
Winebrenner, S., (2003). Teaching strategies for twice-exceptional students. Intervention in School and Clinic, 38(3),131-137.


Websites:

Australian Dyspraxia Support Group and Resource Centre Incorporated. What is Developmental Dyspraxia? Available online: www.dyspraxia.com.au

The Dyspraxia Support Group of New Zealand Incorporated. What is Dyspraxia? Available online: www.dyspraxia.org.nz