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.