|
Gifted and
Learning Disabled?
For
many, the notion of an individual being both gifted and learning disabled
is a paradox that is not easily comprehended.
These children and adults do exist however, and the identification
and teaching of such individuals is a great and immediate challenge to
those of us who are evaluators and educators.
While the field of gifted/LD is one of potential controversy,
research has shown us that these two conditions can, and do, exist
simultaneously.
Children defined as such display remarkable strengths and/or
talents in some areas and disabling weaknesses in others (Baum, 1998).
According to Susan Baum, the key to identifying this heterogeneous
group is to understand three categories: 1) identified gifted students who
have subtle learning disabilities, 2) unidentified students whose gifts
and disabilities may be masked by average achievement, and 3) identified
learning disabled students who are also gifted, although not recognized as
such. For
students identified as gifted who possess a subtle learning disability,
the gaps in their achievement often widen with age.
A common mistake made by professionals is to consider average
achievement in a child whose aptitude is superior or beyond to be
sufficient.
Somehow this type of under-achievement does not seem as insidious
as the under-achievement seen in a child of average ability.
Yet what we know is that such an aptitude-achievement discrepancy
within a gifted person can have dire consequences in terms of self-esteem
and being able to perform to one’s potential.
A comprehensive evaluation that considers not only
aptitude-achievement discrepancies, but more importantly, intra-cognitive
and intra-achievement discrepancies (strengths and weaknesses within
one’s own cognitive and achievement profile) can help determine the
cause of
the under-achievement.
Identification of a disability would help the student understand
why s/he is experiencing academic difficulty and help him/her and teachers
use strategies to go beyond a mediocre level of achievement. Students
who are gifted/LD, but are not identified as either, use their cognitive
prowess to maintain achievement at
grade level.
Their precocious abilities allow them to work overtime to
compensate for one or more processing weakness which may be an undiagnosed
learning disability.
These students are often difficult to identify, and they may not
recognize their disability until they are adults.
These students, however, may display unusual talents in
non-academic activities and settings and their creativity, leadership
abilities, and/or problem solving abilities may be unmasked in an
environment that nurtures such traits. Identified
learning disabled students who are also gifted often have significant
problems in school and their talents may reside in a non-verbal capacity
that is not fostered in a traditional academic environment.
Their failures may overshadow any glimmer of talent and the great
effort expended on remediation leaves little time to focus on any
strengths.
These students are often described as disruptive by teachers and
may use their advanced abilities to avoid tasks.
Yet these students too may excel outside of school.
They might be the ones who create elaborate cartoon strips, build
incredible structures, organize a community plan for recycling, etc.
According to Renzulli (1978) “the creative abilities,
intellectual strengths, and passions they bring to their hobbies are clear
indicators of their potential for giftedness.” What
Can Be Done? Evaluators
and teachers of children have an obligation to educate themselves about
this population. Vermont does not mandate identification or education of
gifted and talented students. As such, many teachers do not obtain
information about how to recognize or teach this population.
Special education services will often address the learning
disability, but not the gift.
Advanced placement classes, which would serve the intellectual
needs of many, are often out of reach of these students because their
problems with reading, or writing, or spelling have not allowed them to
obtain grades necessary for entrance.
With time and information, however; we can begin to create humane
educational practices for these individuals.
First, we must recognize the seriousness of under-achievement in
high ability students, even if that level of under-achievement is
“average”.
Second, we must investigate processing problems (there is usually a
history of problems that began when the child entered school).
Next, if a processing deficit, or learning disability, is
discovered, we must not only remediate the weakness, we must also focus
attention on the development of the student’s intellectual capabilities.
Enrichment that bypasses processing deficits and allows students to
thrive with their intellectual peers might include an advanced math class,
computer class, technical class, drama club, debate team, etc.
Furthermore, students need to have a nurturing environment where
individual differences are honored and compensations strategies
encouraged.
Perhaps most importantly, students must have their learning
differences demystified.
When the intellectually precocious part of the intellect sets the
standards, it is indeed frustrating when certain parts of the brain or
body do not measure up. Helping
students understand and accept both their strengths and weaknesses will
make life much easier and in turn they will become better advocates for
themselves. In
closing, I would like to share an excerpt from John Dixon’s, The
Spatial Child, “We educators must attempt to recognize any childhood
behavior that could be a precursor to adult accomplishment.
Had Isaac Newton’s teachers recognized his construction of
gadgets as an indication of his potential, he might have been seen as
gifted rather than learning disabled.
Had the childhood theatrical and journalistic activities of Winston
Churchill been regarded as an indicators of potential, he might have been
seen as gifted rather than hopeless.....Had his teachers appreciated his
childhood speculations on the nature of magnetism, Albert Einstein might
have been seen as a future scientist rather than a failure.” |