Gifted learning disabled students

Abstract

Up to 30 per cent of gifted students display a learning disability, with 10 per cent reading at two or more years below their grade level. They are referred to as being ‐gifted learning disabled’ or as having the dual exceptionalities of giftedness and learning disabilities. For these students, their learning disability is more likely to be recognised and targeted in teaching than their gifted ability. The present study reviews their learning characteristics and explains these in terms of an information processing model of learning. Nine characteristics are addressed: their superior general intellectual ability in at least some domains of knowledge, a global wholistic preference in thinking, a negative academic self‐concept, low resilience in learning, patterns in motivation to learn orientation, their use of metacognifion, their ability to show what they know, their uneven rates of development, their high standards and goals, and the quality of their interpersonal interactions. The paper uses these characteristics to recommend a set of procedures for identifying these students. It examines the influence that a learning disability can have on the display of gifted knowledge and describes how dynamic assessment procedures can be used to obtain a more accurate diagnosis. It describes the two main types of general ability profiles that emerge. Procedures for assessing creativity and divergent thinking, a learning disability, aptitude in particular areas, an intrinsic motivation to learn, self‐concept, metacognition and self management of learning are discussed. To his teachers, Adam was a conundrum. He was a very quick thinker, but not in the ways that would help him excel academically. He had excellent knowledge of a range of subjects but this didn't seem to help him achieve academic success. His answers to questions were unexpected, although, when analysed, creative. On excursions he could be relied on to see ways around obstacles that arose; his teachers valued his ‘native intelligence’ on these occasions. It was less valued in classroom contexts in which they were developing a topic with a group and Adam would interject with ideas and questions that were either ‘marginally relevant’ or ‘further down the track’. They wished he would put his energy more into improving his spelling and writing ability, that were extremely low, and bis recall of the times tables. Ann, an eight year old, was also perplexing to her teachers. In class she was ‘off task’ and daydreamed a lot. She did not finish most tasks, frequently lost her place and made many careless errors. Her distractability meant that she was frequently disruptive. As a consequence, her level of academic achievement was low. Her teacher interpreted her inattention and impulsivity as a lack of interest in learning and her preference to avoid tasks. As well, however, her teacher noticed her comparatively high level reading ability and her advanced oral language capacity and had difficulty reconciling the two sets of observations.