Vance Holmes | December, 2010

 

 

 

Left Behind:

Twice-Exceptionality, Disproportionality

and Cultural Plurality in the Urban Classroom

 

       A gifted student with an emotional/behavioral disorder (EBD), Attention Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), a specific learning disability or a disability such as Asperger’s Disorder, is referred to as a student who is twice-exceptional (2e). This area was chosen as the focus of pedagogical research in the hope that it would aid my long-standing pursuit of answers that explain why so many of Minnesota’s African American students, particularly those in urban schools, are being left behind. Racism and ethnocentricity likely play a role. Minnesota’s teacher workforce is now, and always has been, almost exclusively White. Despite the state’s increasingly multi-linguistic, multicultural student population, the percentage of non-White public school teachers has never risen above 4% of the state’s total teacher population.

       While racial prejudice and the phenomenon President George W. Bush famously branded “the soft bigotry of low expectations” may be contributing factors, prejudice cannot alone account for the wide and persistent disparity in Black and White student success. Diverse urban learners are, generally speaking, quite resourceful and resilient. Black children are just as capable of learning and doing well in school as children from other ethnic and cultural backgrounds. This truth leads me to suspect that the problem, or at least a large part of the problem, must be systemic. It is a fact that students of color are at a higher risk than White students for getting a special education disability label. It is also true that Black students are less likely to be placed in gifted education programs (Blanchett, 2006). The diagnosing and labeling of Black children as having a learning disability in the early years of their school career, and the resultant tracking of children of color into special education classes, has been identified by educational researchers as a system-wide concern (Geisler, Hessler, Gardener & Lovelace, 2009).

       This research to practice project is a dual investigation of both the labels – GT, LD, 2e – and the urban learners who live with them. There are four sections: a review of recently published research, an exploration of cultural disproportionality in special education, a sampling of the current literature on interventions, and a concluding overview of proposed future study.

 

Research Articles

 

       Of the students identified as gifted/talented – one in every six has also been diagnosed as LD.  Some experts estimate that, if properly tested for, over 5% of all learners would qualify as twice-exceptional (Weinfeld, Barnes-Robinson & Shevitz, 2006).  It is impossible to know precisely how many children in urban schools are twice exceptional learners, since in many cases a child’s giftedness is obscured by his or her learning disorder. Even without complete statistics, the basic numbers suggest there are millions of gifted students who are classified LD and consequently, never recognized as someone also needing accelerated and enriched instruction.

 

Creating a Toolkit for Identifying Twice-Exceptional Students

Highlighted in this article by William Morrison and Mary Rizza is the reality that the identification of twice-exceptional students remains a great challenge for our public schools. The authors relate that often, twice-exceptional learners “go unnoticed because they do not exhibit the behaviors” that typically prompt a preferral. The “underrepresentation of students with disabilities in gifted programs” is also noted as a major issue in the area of twice-exceptionality. Several other researchers are cited having found that the identification process of students into gifted and special education programs tends to be mutually exclusive. This adds to the misdiagnosis of the twice-exceptional.

Study Participants / Methodology: Research involved learners from three school districts in an unnamed Midwest state: a large urban district of more than 62,000 students, a suburban district with total enrollment of 2,054 and a small rural district with 1,107 students in four buildings. Along with the head researchers from Bowling Green State University, research teams included district personnel such as psychologists, general education teachers, the special education director, and at least one administrator. Interview and focus-group discussions comprised the primary data collected for this project. The protocol of questions was “general and asked informants to describe practices.” Data was analyzed using qualitative methods and “grounded theory” techniques.

Intervention Description: The authors state that the goal of the project was to ascertain “best practices in the identification of the twice-exceptional and design an appropriate set of strategies to insure equitable access to services.” At each district, a team was assembled that was “charged with identifying the key points needed to create an identification plan” for the twice-exceptional. Primary data collected for the project came from interviews and focus group discussions.

Research Findings: The information resulted in several themes related to what researchers termed, “practices in identification and programming” for twice-exceptional students. Themes were organized into four categories: screening, intervention, evaluation and planning. Researchers called the results of their analysis a toolkit of options for districts to use in identifying twice-exceptional learners. The toolkit lists the following four considerations:  (1) recognition of the subtle nuances of dual diagnosis is key to the proper identification of the twice-exceptional; (2)  there must be careful assessment and coursework screening of discrepancies between potential and achievement; (3) in-service training is a critical component;  (4) multidisciplinary referral teams can be extremely effective.

Implications for Practice: This article leads to the conclusion that identification plans should be closely examined to find individual overlap within special education and gifted programs.  A specific process should be employed for the twice-exceptional that features the best identification practices of both programs.

 

The Efficacy of Academic Acceleration for Gifted Minority Students

Over the past few decades, achievement gaps between minority and nonminority students have remained steady. Accelerated placement of high-ability learners has been shown to be effective in closing the gap. This article by Lee, Olszewski-Kubilius and Peternel points out that while acceleration has been established as a viable means of instructional differentiation for gifted students, schools generally use acceleration “very conservatively or not at all.” The authors stress that this is particularly true with gifted, low-income or minority students, who are underrepresented in many gifted programs. Researchers also examined minority students’ reluctance to be placed in advanced or accelerated programs “where they often find themselves as one of only a few minority students surrounded by White and Asian students.” This issue and other peer-pressure factors have often been mentioned in connection with minority student participation in gifted programs.

Study Participants / Methodology: The acceleration research was conducted exclusively with low-income or minority students. Research involved seven teachers and thirty, Grade 4-9, African American or Hispanic learners. All student participants were academically talented and had participated for one to six years in the school's gifted program. This was a qualitative investigation of the “perceptions and experiences of academically talented minority students and their teachers, about an accelerative program in math.” Interviews were the primary data for this study. The set of questions focused on perceptions of advanced math, accelerated placement, experiences with accelerated classes, and peer relationships following acceleration.

Intervention Description: The purpose of this study was to provide comprehensive understanding of what needed to be considered in designing and implementing effective acceleration programs for minority students. A set of learners was selected from a larger group of students who were participating in an accelerative program designed to help elementary and middle school-aged gifted students of color “prepare for advanced tracks in high school.” Core themes from the qualitative data were – perceptions of advanced math, peer relationships, parent support, factors leading to success in advanced math and performance in advanced classes.

Research Findings:  Although limited, the research produced evidence to suggest that acceleration is a viable program option for G/T and 2e learners of color. Researchers reported that the multiyear enrichment program that prepared “gifted minority students to be accelerated in math during middle school” was successful. Students involved in the project demonstrated “significant improvements in their academic performance as evidenced by scores on achievement tests.” Teachers believed that acceleration “provides necessary challenges for students” and makes them more committed to schoolwork. They were far more certain than students about the existence of negative peer pressure. Learner participants found the accelerative program to be a key part of their preparation for placement in honor-level math and science courses in high school. Students reported no substantial negative peer pressure resulting from academic acceleration.

Implications for Practice: Findings derived from generalized research on gifted students show that acceleration leads to a number of positive academic outcomes. Research specifically on students of color and their perceptions and experiences with acceleration warrants a great deal more investigation. This relatively small study projects – but does not confirm – that acceleration programs have a long-term, positive effect on diverse urban students. Clearly, the practical implication of this study is that despite educator concerns about gifted minorities facing accusations of “acting White” and other potential social pressures, these learners should be offered opportunities for acceleration and encouraged to take advantage of such programs.

 

Twice-Exceptional Learners: Effects of Teacher Preparation

The potential for giftedness exists equally in all segments of the student population – including students with disabilities. Therefore, we know that students with disabilities and twice-exceptional learners are underrepresented in the gifted/talented programs of our public schools. There are several potential explanations for the disparity. This article focuses on one of the possible contributing factors: initial identification of the gifted.

The screening and referral process generally relies on teachers' observations and perceptions of learners. Researchers Bianco and Leech point out that while teacher referral is widely used, it is “one of the least reliable and least valid methods” for identification of the gifted and twice-exceptional. Despite the reality that gifted students receive most of their instruction in general education classrooms, teachers are not adequately prepared to identify and serve gifted students with or without disabilities. According to the researchers, only four states – Kansas, Montana, Oregon and Virginia – require gifted and talented training as part of their initial teacher preparatory programs.

Study Participants / Methodology: This study comprised 277 participants who were instructors working in a south Florida school district. Among them were 52 special education teachers, 195 general education teachers, and 30 teachers of the gifted.

Intervention Description: Stated goal of this “mixed qualitative and quantitative” analysis was to explore differences among teachers on their “perceptions of students with disabilities and their willingness to refer them to a gifted and talented program.” Teachers were identified by type then randomly assigned to focus-groups. Each group was provided with a vignette describing a hypothetical student with gifted characteristics. Student descriptions included one of three treatment conditions: no exceptionality label, LD label, or EBD label. After reading the vignettes, participants completed a survey. Three questions were investigated: (1) Do referral ratings for gifted programs differ among general education teachers, special education teachers, and teachers of the gifted? (2) Do referral ratings for gifted programs differ among teachers who believe that the student has a LD, an EBD, or no exceptional condition? (3) Is there an interaction between labeled conditions and teacher certification type?

Research Findings: The sample of participants was limited to instructors from a single district in Florida. Still, profound effects were uncovered. Mean scores by teacher type revealed that special education teachers were least likely to refer the hypothetical student for gifted services. Scores also revealed that instructors were more likely to agree – or strongly agree – to refer “nonlabeled” students for gifted programs than identically described students with the label of either LD or EBD. Instructors of the gifted were significantly more likely to refer the profiled student for gifted services, with or without disabilities. Findings unambiguously demonstrate that referral recommendations for gifted services are influenced by teacher preparation.

Implications for Practice: Researchers observed that there were substantial differences among teacher groups in screening and referral of the gifted. Special education teachers were found least likely of teacher types to refer students to a gifted program. This is troubling when one considers that twice-exceptional students are often first identified for their disability. The implication is that many of the twice-exceptional go unrecognized as being gifted. Inadequate teacher training is one probable cause for the under-identification of gifted students with disabilities. Professional development and teacher training centered on 2e learners is vital.

 

Effective Teaching Strategies for Gifted/LD Students with Spatial Strengths

Researcher Rebecca Mann contends that high-ability learners with spatial strengths and verbal deficiencies rarely have the opportunity to demonstrate their gifts in American high schools. Many of the tests used to identify the gifted and twice-exceptional, value performance speed over the reflective thinking that is characteristic of learners with spatial strengths. High school instructors tend to emphasize math and verbal abilities since those are the focus areas of college admissions examinations and other high-stakes testing. As a result, says Mann, individuals with spatial strengths “are disproportionately undereducated and underemployed relative to their ability level when compared with equally gifted individuals with strengths in mathematical and verbal areas.”

Study Participants / Methodology: The strategies in this study were used with a population of students who were not successful in traditional educational settings. Participants were a group of learners from a private high school in the Northeast that specializes in educating students with learning disabilities. Learners in the study were not specifically labeled as twice-exceptional. Five instructors at the target school had identified study participants as having significant “learning differences.” The students observed for this study were typically labeled as having learning disabilities while also having spatial strengths.

Intervention Description: The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine teaching strategies that were effective for students with spatial strengths and verbal weaknesses. Students and teachers were interviewed about the strategies that they believe lead to student achievement. Data was collected from multiple sources, including interviews with the five instructors and Dean of Academic Affairs, field notes from observations, and document review.

Research Findings: The predominant themes to emerge from the research were strength-oriented accommodations, student-centered learning, and an atmosphere of caring. Caring about the learner as an individual was a critical factor in approach. Commenting on which teaching strategies were most effective, one math instructor advised, “Don’t get caught up in techniques, get caught up in the student.” Teachers emphasized understanding each individual student’s strengths and developing an awareness of the learner’s current level of functioning.

Implications for Practice: Gifted youth with spatial strengths and verbal deficiencies must have their strengths nurtured. Minimizing the amount of time spent in their areas of deficiency and maximizing the time spent in their “area of passion” has been shown to have a positive effect on improving outcomes for these learners. Instructional strategies that appear to be successful in teaching high-ability learners with spatial strengths and verbal deficiencies include those with an emphasis on student interests, student choice and experiential learning. Instruction needs to center on conceptual thinking with a “whole-to-part” approach.

 

Differentiated Writing Interventions for High-Achieving Urban Students

African American children are at higher risk than other children for receiving a special education disability label, and they are less likely to be placed in gifted education. Authors Geisler, Hessler, Gardner and Lovelace note that this is in large part due to students’ poor performance in core academic areas such as reading, math, and writing. Differentiating instruction in early grades could assist in closing the writing performance gap between African American and majority students. Most teachers however, receive little to no training regarding the needs of high-achieving students. Citing a Department of Education report, the writers say despite recognition that far too often, high-ability students fail to achieve their full potential – underachievement is still a common occurrence among our most promising students (U.S. Department of Education, 1993).

Study Participants / Methodology: The study was conducted in a first/second-grade split classroom composed of 21 African American students at an urban elementary school in a Midwestern metropolitan school district. The survey examined five students and employed a single-case research design to examine the effect of certain interventions. The primary data collector was the teacher-researcher. A doctoral student in special education was the secondary data collector.

Intervention Description:  The article outlines two strategies for improving student writing: a self-monitoring technique and a vocabulary exercise. Examined were the effects of using word-counting and synonym lists on the length and quality of writing of “five high-achieving urban African American first graders.” Quality was determined by scores assigned to writing samples based on a district rubric. Evaluators used the K–2 writing rubric to score the generalization probe essays – all of which had been stripped of identifying information.

Research Findings: To determine the effects of the two interventions on the writing skills of the five gifted students, the number of total words and different words written was analyzed. Outcome scores were close across the three probe essays. All five students demonstrated improved writing outcomes. All increased the amount of writing and number of different words they produced in the intervention phases compared to baseline results. Furthermore, all learner participants demonstrated an improvement in quality. The results of the study demonstrate that high-ability urban students need a challenging curriculum that extends beyond what is appropriate for their typically achieving peers. Challenging students to write a greater number of different words, and having them self-monitor by self-counting, can increase the quality of written expression.

Implications for Practice: Instructional interventions that improve vocabulary – and potentially improve writing quality – include self-monitoring and the use of synonym lists. This research supports the general strategy of employing differentiated interventions for high-achieving students of color in order to better increase the likelihood that they will achieve at a level commensurate with their abilities.

 

Disproportionality

 

Most intriguing about the area of twice-exceptionality are the incident rates and other identification statistics involved, as they relate to the increasingly diverse urban classroom. African American students are overrepresented in special education and underrepresented in gifted education. Twice-exceptional learners of color, with their unique blend of assets, deficits and cultural differences, are likely the lost and left behind victims of this systemic disparity. The following items examine the phenomenon of cultural disproportionality in America’s public schools.

 

Understanding and Addressing Disproportionate Representation

Spencer Salend and Laurel Duhaney identify the disproportionate representation of students of color in special education as a critical challenge facing educators and school districts. The purpose of the article is to help educators address this challenge by providing information on disproportionality and guidelines for delivering effective services. Several questions are explored: What is disproportionality? What factors contribute to the disproportionate representation of students of color in special education? What can educators do to minimize the disparity and how can they evaluate success?

Cultural disproportionality is defined as the extent to which students with particular cultural characteristics are placed in a “specific type of educational program or provided access to services, resources, curriculum, and instructional and classroom management strategies.” Disproportionality includes both overrepresentation and underrepresentation. Educators can help minimize the disparate numbers of students of color in special education by creating a diverse, multidisciplinary planning team, advocating for high-quality prereferral services, using classroom-based assessment alternatives to standardized testing, and employing culturally responsive teaching techniques – including culturally appropriate behavior management strategies. Teachers also can continually assess their success at addressing disproportionate representation “by collecting and examining data and reflecting upon the impact” of policies and practices.

 

Disproportionate Representation of African American Students

This article places the dilemma of disproportionality in the context of “the White privilege and racism that exist in American society as a whole.” Author, Wanda Blanchett, discusses how educational resource allocation, inappropriate curriculum, and inadequate teacher preparation have contributed to the problem of disproportionate representation. “Race matters,” Blanchett argues, “both in educators’ initial decisions to refer students for special education and in their subsequent placement decisions” for students labeled as having disabilities. Several supporting statistics are cited. African American students account for only 14.8% of the general population of 6-to-21-year-old students, but they make up 20% of the special education population across all disabilities. They are 2.41 times more likely than White students to be identified as having mental retardation, 1.13 times more likely to be labeled as learning disabled, and nearly twice as likely to be found to have an emotional or behavioral disorder.

While research has exposed various reasons for the disparity, the author laments that few attempts have been made to establish oppression, White privilege and racism as contributing to disproportionality. Special education, it is suggested, has become a form of segregation, separating Black students from the mainstream classroom. Although tough to read at times, this article presents a strong case for examining the persistent problem of disproportionality in the context of larger societal issues such as race and class. Additional research is needed to document the ways in which racism and cultural inequity can be removed from public education. Clearly there is a need to develop strategies and interventions to eradicate discriminatory practices. The first step for educators is to become culturally competent classroom managers.

 

Interventions

 

Students who are twice-exceptional may struggle with assignments that are typically considered “easy” and require rote memorization, yet they thrive when engaged in activities requiring higher order thinking and creative problem solving. Finding appropriate and effective intervention strategies for a 2e learner depends on his or her particular combination of exceptionalities. However, Jewler, Barnes-Robinson, Shevitz and Weinfeld in their article, Bordering on Excellence, list four potential stumbling blocks for smart kids with learning difficulties: writing, organization, reading and memory (2008). In order to reach their potential and maximize learning, high-ability students with learning disabilities must have their special needs recognized. Careful and continual assessment is key. Researchers seem to generally agree that developing skills in areas of challenge should be approached through the student’s identified strengths and passions.

The next items look at interventions for two specific types of exceptional urban learners.

 

The Effects of Self-Management in General Education Classrooms

This study by Gureasko-Moore, Dupaul and White was done to evaluate the effects of using a “self-management procedure to enhance the classroom preparation skills of secondary school students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).” Three male students enrolled in a public secondary school were selected for the research. The intervention involved training in classroom preparation skills. Results were consistent across the three participants in enhancing preparation behaviors. Research demonstrated that self-management interventions, such as the student log and the self-monitoring checklist used in this study, can dramatically improve the classroom preparation behaviors of learners with ADHD. Students may apply self-management techniques in all classes to enhance organization skills and preparation behaviors.

 

Instructional Strategies for Improving Achievement for English Language Learners

Since the introduction of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, there has been emphasis in education on the improved academic performance of all students, including English language learners who have Individualized Education Programs. Shyyan, Thurlow and Liu examine reading, mathematics, and science instructional strategies for English language learners with disabilities. Estimates indicate that approximately 9% of English language learners are on Individualized Education Programs. However, there are wide discrepancies among school districts in the categorization of students with special needs. Accurate identification and placement of English language learners with a disability is an established concern.

The findings in this study indicate that outcomes for English language learners with disabilities can be significantly improved with proper interventions. Based on the authors' review of literature on effective practices, a list of approaches to instruction and assessment of ELLs with disabilities was generated. It includes cooperative learning, balance of linguistic and cognitive demands, opportunities to use both academic and conversational English, appropriate feedback, use of reinforcing visuals, and strong home–school connections.

 

Concluding Overview

 

Proposed areas of additional scholarship include examination of the screening and referral process, and inquiry into culturally responsive teaching strategies that are proven to engage the twice-exceptional. Also, further research is needed to discover how instructional techniques, found to be beneficial for 2e learners, can be incorporated into general lesson plan designs.

As I continue my studies, I take along a set of concluding principles that are the start of a framework for responding to twice-exceptionality in the urban classroom. This research has yielded a six-point framework: (1) recognition of disproportionality as it relates to proper identification and advocacy;  (2) careful screening of student assessment and coursework for discrepancies between potential and achievement; (3) strategic use of differentiated interventions; (4) approach skills in the learner’s areas of challenge through identified strengths; (5) provide opportunities for enrichment and acceleration; and (6) deliver caring, culturally responsive instruction, emphasizing student interests, student choice, and experiential learning.

The foregoing conclusions are only the beginning of my continuing body of research addressing gifted minority students who also have learning differences, disabilities or emotional / behavioral disorders. Many of these students are under-identified and underserved. Understanding the unique needs of these children is critically important. The twice-exceptional learners of color being left behind are the children most capable of closing the achievement gap and moving us forward.


 

 

References

 

Amend. E., Schuler. P., Beaver-Gavin. K., Beights. R. (2009). A unique challenge: Sorting out the differences between giftedness and Asperger’s disorder. Gifted Child Today, 32 (4), 57-63.

Bianco, M., Leech, N. (2010). Twice-exceptional learners: Effects of teacher preparation and disability labels on gifted referrals. Teacher Education and Special Education, 33(4), 319-34.

Blanchett. W. (2006). Disproportionate representation of African American students in special education: Acknowledging the role of White privilege and racism. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 24-28.

Bracamonte, M. (2010). Twice-exceptional students: Who are they and what do they need. In Twice-Exceptional Newsletter. Retrieved September, 30, 2010, fromhttp://www.2enewsletter.com/arch_Bracamonte_2e_Students_pubarea_3-10.htm.

Geisler. J., Hessler. T., Gardner. R., Lovelace. T. (2009). Differentiated writing interventions for high-achieving urban African American elementary students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20, 214-247.

Gureasko-Moore. S., Dupaul. G., White. G. (2006). The effects of self-management in general education classrooms on the organizational skills of adolescents With ADHD. Behavior Modification. 30(2), 159-183.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA). Public L. No. 108-446, § 118 Stat. 2647.

Jewler. S., Barnes-Robinson. L., Shevitz. B., Weinfeld. R. (2008). Bordering on excellence: A teaching tool for twice exceptional students. Gifted Child Today, 31(2), 40-46.

Kirk. S., Gallagher. J., Coleman. M., Anastasiow. N. (2009). Educating Exceptional Children. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson.

Lee, S., Olszewski-Kubilius. P, & Peternel, G. (2010). The efficacy of academic acceleration for gifted minority students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54(3), 189-209.

Mann, R. (2006). Effective teaching strategies for gifted / learning-disabled students with spatial strengths. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17(2), 112-121.

Morrison, W., & Rizza, M. (2007). Creating a toolkit for identifying twice-exceptional students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 31(1), 57-76.

Salend. S., Garrick-Duhaney. L. (2005). Understanding and addressing the disproportionate representation of students of color in special education. Intervention in School and Clinic, 40(4), 213-221.

Shyyan. V., Thurlow. M., Liu. K. (2008). Instructional strategies for improving achievement in reading, mathematics, and science for English language learners with disabilities. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 33(3), 145-155.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America’s talent. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Weinfeld. R., Jeweler. L., Barnes-Robinson. S., Shevitz. B. (2006). Smart kids with learning difficulties. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.