History gives us many things. It provides a cultural literacy, or, the cultural capital to develop a lens with which to understand historical names, dates, events, and concepts. Apart from this, and perhaps more importantly, it gives us meaning. It allows us to think critically about important narratives that have occurred over time and in doing so, provides us a format in which to develop meaningful interpretations necessary to examine the events that shape modern society. Should we celebrate Columbus Day or should we lament it? Do the politics of today reflect the politics of pre-Civil War America? How does post-colonialism affect the contemporary world order? Does history tend to repeat itself as time erases memories of the past?

Additionally, the study of history can encapsulate perspectives from different groups, genders, or classes who may have varying views of the events that have unfolded in the past. The review of diverse historical lenses empowers other contributors to stake a claim on the historical landscape and in doing so, provides a platform for authentic discussion, compromise and empathy; traits that are the basic ingredients for active citizenship in a complex and ever changing world. Can society afford to support an uninformed, inflexible, unsympathetic citizenry? Given the present state of political rhetoric these particular characteristics should be emphasized, not ignored.

The astute historian can recognize patterns within historical contexts and teach others to avoid the pitfalls of historical transgressions or disasters. History is a lesson; a lesson of intentions, movements, experiments, and human production; lessons that build integrity and character within our children. History is also virtuous. It is also honest. It depicts for its audience a sense of justice (war tribunals, South African elections of 1994) and outrage at the injustices of people or peoples (Guatemala 1954 or Hungary 1956) provoking kinds of questions that need discussion. Is man inherently good? Who controls the distribution of power and wealth? Whose government for which people? Finally, historical narrations offer us stories of humility, courage, wisdom and most importantly, hope. The stories of human accomplishment in the face of overwhelming odds (Gandhi, Martin Luther King jr., Luther, Mandela) are antidotes to the depictions of human suffering, misery, and failure. But how can we be sure of what we hear, see or read? This is history’s final gift: Accurate accountancy of the past, which, by the way, could be just last week.

In the modern world of inflamed rhetoric, half-truths, social media, and the overwhelming volume of news information, how does one discern what is real? Historical research and analysis can provide some direction. In the first place, know the value of primary sources; sources provided by documentation, artifacts, photos, and eye witness accounts. When we triangulate (use of three separate sources) the evidence we can determine authenticity, authors bias/slant, find context, and, corroborate whether or not the information is truly accurate. When in doubt, secondary sources such as books, articles, commentary, or second hand accounts may be used as long as one again employs at least three to four corroborating reports. While it may sound like a good deal of effort, it is worth disseminating what is accurate as the foundation of any historical claim; essential to understand the context of what is taking place all around us.

In essence, History teaches us to move forward, to recognize our mistakes and learn from them and ultimately create a better existence for all. Consequently, it is imperative for a comprehensive instruction of history to part of every student’s education. It is the past that creates the future. More significantly, it is the past that creates the person and the community within which that person operates. The knowledge of a person’s roots and its connection to his/her present condition gives that person validity as a being within his/her societal setting. Without it we are doomed to repeat our collective pasts.

One of my favorite memories of Jim’s heart and generosity took place in December 2012. A small group of us went to Washington D.C. to advocate for the needs of twice-exceptional students across the nation. I, along with colleagues Barbara Gilman and Dr. Dan Peters joined Jim there in D.C. after we had approached him about our concerns that 2e students were not being properly identified or served in the classroom. Jim took a risk. Using his connections (including his wife Deb who was at that time serving as the Assistant Director of Education) he was able to get us a meeting with the Director of Special Education Services and other high powered officials. I remember how nervous he was before the meeting. He knew that there was a great deal at stake. Fortunately, the meeting went well and resulted in the ‘Letter to Delisle’. A document that gave instructions to all the states regarding the methodology needed to best find 2e children; a letter that is still helping families to this present day.

This was just one of many memories that we will treasure. Jim’s imprint is and will continue to be far reaching. He will be forever remembered as a legend in the field. Our condolences go out to his wife, Deb and his son Matt and the rest of his family and friends. RIP Dr. J!

Our son Alex, one of our three twice-exceptional teenagers and the only one who was able to officially graduate from high school (with ongoing support), would often spend his ‘off’ days sleeping. Sometimes, he would be out for 12-14 hours at a time. One might think this pattern of behavior is somewhat unusual, even for a teen boy. In fact, we received plenty of advice from family and friends as to how to address the ‘issue’. In fact, with every visit, we were advised that this is not normal.

“Clearly there was something wrong with the boy.” They would postulate. “Shouldn’t you get that checked out?”

Despite the pressure, we didn’t and quite frankly, I was tired of trying to explain that twice-exceptional children require a different set of rules and expectations than their typical peers. They are different! They experience atypical neural and physiological development; they develop atypical social and emotional skills; they approach the world in an atypical manner; and, adjust to circumstances in an extraordinary fashion. Why would we subject our child to a formulaic system of expectations and behaviors when they clearly need an alternative solution? As such, we treated this behavior in our usual fashion with a couple grains of salt. We knew that twice-exceptional children are prone to fatigue due to the exertion of daily compensation mechanisms that allowed Alex to attend school. He needed and continues to need the extra rest.

Our twice-exceptional children (and adults) deal with all kinds of challenges on a daily basis. They are extremely bright yet struggle to accommodate at least one diagnosable disability. In fact, the majority face the added challenge of having multiple areas of weakness that inhibit daily operations. The reality is that coping with a disability (or camouflaging to appear normal) produces stress, frustration, and anxiety. In addition, many deal with sensory processing issues that also inhibit how they are able to interact with their environment. For example, a student with a case of shadow dyslexia attempting to keep up with the notes in an AP History classroom. She has the ability but not the accommodation or support. The work load grows as does the anxiety increasing stress and fatigue that, in turn, affects performance and possibly attendance.

A more formal understanding of the impact of fatigue on the daily routine of the twice-exceptional can be summarized in two words; code switching. The term code switching describes the continual pattern of shifting between the expectations of two very different worlds; the world of societal norms and expectations versus the world of twice-exceptionality. Within their ‘comfort’ zone, the twice-exceptional can operate with ease, adhering to atypical patterns of behavior, acceptance, and probabilities. In the real world, those behaviors are generally not accepted as ‘normal’ forcing the twice exceptional to continually adjust or accommodate the particular space in which they find themselves. Continual code-switching generates fatigue and by the end of the day, the student is exhausted. Finding their comfort zone and getting the appropriate rest is an essential factor in whether or not they will be able to repeat the cycle the following day. To be sure, homework assignments and assigned chores only serve to further exacerbate the problem. Indeed, over time, fatigue unchecked can lead to longer periods of school absences, growing emotional turmoil, and a negative spiral of doubt, incompetency, and self-worth. So, what are we to do?

In the first place, it is important to identify any suspected disabilities. Twice Exceptional children are masters at disguising, however, as the rigor of school programming increases over the years, the collision between school expectations and functionality also increases and the end result is generally a negative one. Identifying the weakness allows the parents and child to seek assistance, support, and perhaps most importantly, develop a metacognitive strategy of self-worth and acceptance, despite what may be initially perceived as a problem. Knowledge is power.

Secondly, set up expectations within the household that are agreed upon by both the parents and child. These understandings should take into account all aspects and parameters of the daily schedule including school, homework, activities, etc. to ensure the child receives adequate rest. Additionally, one might want to set up a private parent/student journal that can serve as a communication device as to how the child is feeling within their daily routine.

Thirdly, advocate for you child in the school setting. The school cannot act if they do not know. Applying for a 504 Plan or even an IEP can help alleviate daily stresses such as homework, taking notes, seating plans, test taking, and much more. In general, twice-exceptional children struggle with slow processing speed and need additional time to process, formulate responses, tackle assignments, and produce work. Indeed, an incredible source of stress for twice-exceptional children happens to be homework expectations. The reality is that homework is rarely productive (contact the author for the article: ‘The Homework Dilemma’ at mpost97@gmail.com)

Finally, build an effective communication system with your child. This means careful listening, realistic expectations, scheduled check-ins, guarded words, and an awareness that twice-exceptional children are extremely perceptive. They can read your every look, expression, and emotion. Be careful what you say, even when you’re angry or frustrated. Positive and consistent communications can help to build a confident, self-assured child; despite the challenges.

Fatigue is real. Our twice-exceptional children battle every day to navigate a world that is not designed with their needs in mind. As their parent, guardian, or even teacher, it is imperative that we recognize their need for personal space, rest, and acceptance. In doing so, we can contribute to their unique gifts that just might change the world. Just not today. Today they need to sleep.

How do we teach our gifted/twice-exceptional learners? To begin, you must start with neurodevelopment. Over the decades, the research on the neurodevelopment of both gifted and twice-exceptional individuals has been growing. We now know that the gifted/2e brain is physically different than more typically developing brains. We also know the capacity to take in sensory information (epigenetics) is more intense, is processed at a greater speed/depth, and can lead to an asynchronous relationship between the intellectual and emotional centers within the brain (pre-frontal cortex vs. the limbic system) leading to greater vulnerability in the areas of social and emotional intelligence that, in turn, affects behavior, learning, and the maturation of executive functioning skills. Thus, the paradox: highly intelligent students with lower emotional control and/or social maturity. As an educator, one must always be aware that this asynchrony often leads to

misunderstanding of behaviors (pre-meditated vs. limbic reaction), misdiagnosis, and social isolation. Past emotional triggers can lead to intense reactions and the inability to calm oneself. Even small instances like the invasion of one’s private space; the presence of overwhelming sensory stimuli; frustration built due to the vast separation of intellectual potential and the presence of a disability, or even the misinterpreted sideways glance of an adult, can lead to tears (or some other freeze, flight, fight response) putting the student in a state of cognitive distress. In other cases, we may see defiance and/or argumentative reactions that, In many cases, reflect defensive responses or conceived threats. As educators, we may understand the source of the behavior. Therefore, before jumping to conclusions and/or disciplining the student in traditional ways, we must dig deeper into the root causes of behavior. What happened? Why did it happen? What are the root causes? Too often, twice-exceptional students feel increased isolation, guilt, or shame, when even their own teachers do not take the time to truly understand that. As such, a basic knowledge of neuro-science is imperative in understanding the twice-exceptional population as it builds to the foundation towards identification, understanding, and growth.

Of course, to find the twice-exceptional child one must identify them. In my estimation, our systems are only identifying a fraction of this group of students. Traditional tools tend to rely on achievement rather than intellectual potential and due to the presence of one or more disabilities, the twice-exceptional student generally struggles to do well on these assessments. In addition, most identification tools for gifted programming contain timed elements within the tests. Any student with lower processing speed; and many twice-exceptional kids are challenged in this area, will not be able to fully complete the assessment within the allotted time. There are other factors including geographical restraints (many areas do not have gifted programming), lack of knowledge (staff development around giftedness is rare), as well as a lack of appropriate programming.

Consequently, when programming is available, It is very important to use multiple measures to be able to properly identify twice-exceptional learners. We must go beyond the intelligence or achievement assessment. To find twice-exceptional students, one must look carefully at discrepancy data and interpret why there is the presence of scattered scores (both highs and lows). What is going on? Seeing highly discrepant data holds the clue to further investigation and yes, further understanding. Highly intelligent students with ASD, ADD, dyslexia, specific learning difficulties, and other disorders will encounter difficulties in certain areas of performance. For example, many struggle with the more mundane portions of the assessment that do not stimulate the brain. This is especially true for students with ADD/ADHD due to sluggish cognitive tempo. Others, such as those with ASD may have difficulty with any sub-tests that require timed portions due to slower processing. It is not that they do not know the information, but retrieval can be passive in nature. Others that may have hidden auditory or visual processing issues can be frustrated by the any number of the sub tests. These examples (and many more) result in deflated scoring and/or misidentification for gifted or advanced programming. There are varying means to calculate intelligence test that provide a more accurate picture of a child’s true potential i.e. the General Ability Index versus the Full-Scale IQ when discrepant data is present. As an educator, one must always look deeper in the data to find the glimpses of brilliance that twice-exceptional students possess. In addition, chronological histories are important to better understand the metacognitive journey that each student has experienced for a better understand on their abilities as well as the areas of weakness that still need accommodation. Again, comprehensive analysis is key.

Beyond identification, is programming and pedagogy. The first question to be addressed is programming. Are we providing the appropriate opportunities to engage the twice-exceptional student? Does the material allow for depth, breadth, and complexity? Is student ownership available? Is there flexibility in the approach? In past surveys of both gifted and twice-exceptional students, it was revealed that honesty, integrity, trust building, and depth of knowledge remain the qualities most appreciated in educators. As such, it is important to understand that character matters when working with neuro-diverse students. Of course, this is easier written than practiced. As so many programs are developed around achievement, it may be time to reevaluate where the needs and interests of twice-exceptional learners might fit in. For the regular classroom teacher, there is no choice. Twice-exceptional students will be part of your class.

So where do we start? For those educators practiced in front-loading instruction through diagnostic assessment, your techniques do not have to vary much. Proper diagnostic assessment is step one. Through it, you will be able to understand where every student lies against the standard(s) you want to achieve. You will know if they are already well ahead of the learning goals, where the gaps might be, which learning styles fit best, or how you might proceed with your pedagogical approach. The only additional item might be affective in nature; that being getting to know your student well to anticipate both emotional and social patterns of behavior. Certainly, diagnostic assessment is just the first step. Formative assessment for learning (not of learning) must also be practiced as twice-exceptional kids can have scattered approaches to learning depending on a variety of factors including readiness, interests, mood, feeling safe in the classroom, and others. This is where patience and flexibility are a must. These are not typical students. They have depilating learning issues accompanied by extraordinary intellectual potential. It is a constant battle between those conditions that will lead to frustration, anger, fatigue, and even defiance. Therefore, some days will be much better than others. Your patience will be tried. From a practical perspective, the first rule of thumb in engaging twice-exceptional learners is this: Teach to their strengths first and use those strengths to remediate any challenges. This is imperative and remains a central tenet in the practice of teaching twice-exceptional students. Of course, they will still need remediation and accommodation. However, if we use a deficit based remedial approach, we will lose them. They need to be motivated intellectually even while participating in remediation.

As educators, we must insist on a wholistic approach to pedagogy characterized by empathy, understanding, knowledge, and opportunity. This is why, in addition to patience and flexibility, one must challenge the student by adding depth, breadth, and complexity. There is a world of knowledge at our fingertips. Use it. Every twice-exceptional student that I have worked with over the past two plus decades has at least one or two areas of passion. If you can engage that passion into your instruction using a thematic approach, you can reach your set standards and much more. For examples, if you are teaching a unit on pulleys and levers and energy transformation, perhaps building a small Rube Goldberg machine (and maybe extending that to complex machines) can enhance the practical nature of the lesson and engage all your students, including the twice-exceptional. Or perhaps they are highly interested in Dungeons and Dragons. There are dozens of historical, geographical, and language arts applications that can be applied to that game or other fantasy/strategy games like it. Most students I have and continue to work with love these genres. In the end, the pathway to student engagement for twice-exceptional students is empathy, knowledge, and understanding. KNOW YOUR STUDENTS. For those in the secondary grades, this may pose more challenge given the numbers of students you see daily, but it is still attainable.

My first teaching assignment occurred in the mid-nineties in an inner-city school. I taught eighth grade American History and had 175 students come through my door each day. As a beginning teacher, the challenge was overwhelming. I knew nothing of good pedagogy, let alone gifted yet I instinctively understood that to reach my kids I need to build a trust relationship with them. This took time. However, after a couple of months of playing basketball with both the boys during lunch (and after school); playing double-dutch with girls; and being open to all their questions and challenges. I was able to trust that lead to better relationships, understanding, and student progress in a wholistic manner. Again, the key to reaching them is knowing them. Finally, open communication with the family is key. Parents of twice-exceptional children tend to get overwhelmed and stressed from all the nuances of raising the child: many of whom may be able to make it through a school day but ‘let it all out’ upon returning home. However, they also have a vast repertoire of knowledge regarding the child’s history and may provide additional information on how to work with them. As you build a profile of learning for your twice-exceptional students, tap into this source when you can. While each twice-exceptional learner is unique, each experience can provide you with more tools, knowledge and perspective.

Indeed, twice-exceptional students can be quite challenging to work with. They present a paradox; a puzzle of learning daily, however, when we as educators truly make the effort to understand them; to really know them; those challenges are rewarded tenfold.

Historically, there have always been numerous obstacles to educating the highly gifted; the greatest of which is traditional infrastructure. Schools, teachers, curriculum, classrooms, schedules, administration, educational theory, and societal norms have all played a part in the systematic dismissal of intellectual potential of our gifted youth. We have created a system of public and private education geared towards the development of the average students in congruence with the congressional ruling 1975’s Education for all Handicapped Children Act. Not that this is wrong. All children deserve the right to free and appropriate education designed to fit their potential. However, to put it simply, our system does little, if anything, to accommodate children with exceptional gifts in the area of cognitive ability. To be fair, attempts have been made to repudiate this trend by instituting new initiatives such as schoolwide enrichment programs, and/or classroom differentiation. Yet, with very few exceptions, these measures have failed the highly gifted student, due in part to the extreme complexity that characterizes this inimitable learner who arrives at the educational feast with the extreme learning characteristics and extraordinary academic, social, and emotional needs. Indeed, schoolwide enrichments, characterized by literature circles, grouping strategies, accelerated math groups, or learning extensions, are often used only after required work is complete and may only be incorporated as ‘in addition to’ or ‘busy’ work. Even in the event that this work may be an ongoing classroom strategy, it often fails to reach the highly gifted student. Differentiation, a popular educational strategy designed to level instruction based on the student’s ability, interest areas, or readiness, is hardly comprehensive or widespread. When incorporated, it is limited in its effectiveness due to lack of teacher training, large heterogeneous classrooms, and the dearth of planning time a teacher receives on a daily basis. In addition, it is difficult to reach the highly gifted student who requires complexity, appropriate pacing, depth and breadth of instruction, and the use of decidedly differentiated materials. Consequently, the highly gifted child does not participate in guided instruction. Rather, she is left to her own devices on a consistent basis and may learn very little within the regular classroom environment. Who is this child, one might ask, and why is it so difficult to teach him?

Part of the difficulty lies in the reality that each and every highly gifted child is a unique pupil. They present different learning profiles, different interests, vary in terms of intellectual potential, and learn at different paces and in diverse ways. In addition, many present characterizations of asynchrony make it exceedingly difficult to nail down physiognomies of the ‘prototypical’ highly gifted learner and thus, make it difficult to create quality instruction on a consistent basis. Nevertheless, there are common features that can be identified to assist in serving their educational needs. In her book, high IQ kids, gifted education authority, Dr. Karen Rogers, says this:

“The keys to schooling these children are to link them whenever possible with the others close to them in intellectual functioning; to provide consistent, daily challenges with appropriate pacing and little practice; and to accelerate their exposure to content and skills they will need to be successful in college and in their adult lives. Their teachers must move away from the teacher versus student mode of operation and focus on the facilitator/learner relationship, in which the teacher and student work together enjoying learning and implanting the child’s foundational learning outcomes.” (Rogers, 2007)

This summary was formulated based on a compilation of research from Dr. Rogers and other gifted and talented theorists such as Mirica Gross, Linda Silverman, Deidra Lovecky, W. Dahlberg, and of course, one of the foundational scholars in the field of gifted and talented occasion, Leta Hollingsworth, who, alongside Lewis Terman, initiated the very first long-term studies on the lives of the highly gifted individual. Thanks, in part, to their pioneering work, we now have a better grasp of who the highly gifted child is and how they learn best within an educational setting. We have also learned that there are varying levels of giftedness. A child identified as gifted and talented at the low end of the IQ spectrum has a very different learning profile than that of a highly or profoundly gifted child. They learn in different ways, they require varied pacing guides, and vary in terms of social emotional development. For the highly gifted child, it should be noted that social emotional development may be delayed in opposition to their high intellectual ability. For the average gifted learner, this asynchronous development may be less pronounced, thus requiring a different approach to teaching and learning.

The IQ score or intelligence quotient, while still controversial, remains the single best predictor of intellectual potential for a large part of the general population (there is some argument over its effectiveness in assessing minority populations and/or students of poverty where a more comprehensive approach to identification is required). This score can be obtained with the use of IQ assessments such as the Stanford-Binet V intelligence scale, or the WISC-5 (Weschler Scale of Intelligence for Children). IQ scores generally appear in the form of a Bell Curve with the average mean score situated at between IQ 100 to 110. As the score increases, the assumption is, so does the cognitive capacity of the individual, and vice versa. One standard deviation within the curve equates to 15 points. To illustrate this more clearly, one may look at the standards of identification for special education which generally require an approximate IQ score of 85, or one standard deviation below average. Using the same logic, you can identify different levels of giftedness. On average two standard deviations, or a score of IQ 130, is considered to be in the gifted range. Gifted individuals, it is widely believed, can be served by a school system that stresses the need for continual differentiation of curriculum, provides stream enrichment opportunities, and has teaching staff that, in general, understands the gifted learner. Given this level of instruction and lower instances of pronounced asynchrony, the average gifted child can succeed in both school and beyond. That being said, a score of IQ 130 remains the lowest level of giftedness. Yet, many identified gifted and talented scores above this unwritten baseline. The fact is that the higher the intelligence, the more profound the need for providing a specialized education within a focused environment. Gifted students can be identified with higher intelligence scores on a spectrum that ranges from gifted to the highly gifted, and even to the exceptionally or profoundly range. It is these students that we must seek to educate in the appropriate manner as they are rarely successful in traditional educational settings. It is true that intelligence scores are just numbers. Still, it is also true that these numbers are laden with significant implications; the greater the intelligence, the greater the need for academic intervention. Certainly, there is ample evidence to suggest that as intelligence increases, so does the need for academic event intervention, in an exponential manner. In short, the cognitive differences separating two students whose intelligences are recorded at IQ 130 and IQ 135 respectively, are less prevalent than if those same two learners were diagnosed with IQs 140 and 145 respectively. Thus, the greater the IQ, the greater the need for early intercession. To simplify the point, if special education requirements begin after a single standard deviation below the norm, one could postulate that the same actions be taken for the gifted child scoring at least two standard deviations of the average learner or beyond. Within a lock and step approach to education that emphasizes standardized growth targets, the educational needs of the gifted, and especially that highly gifted child are being ignored. As outliers, the highly gifted child does not represent the majority of students within the classroom or even a small percentage of it. As such, this child is often disregarded, stuck in a consistent pattern of repetition and educational ennui . The numbers do not lie. Special education programs consistently represent more than 30% of a school district’s budget whereas gifted programming represents less than 1% of that same budget. One can postulate that staff development and training follows the trail of funding. In general, teachers are not prepared nor given sufficient training to understand or meet the needs of this educational enigma; an outlier whose learning characteristics differ greatly from that of the average child.

The highly gifted child is a very different type of learner. They develop both metaphysically and cognitively in a different manner than the typical child and thus require a different approach to instruction. Recent research by neuroscientists studying the gifted brain and body have revealed a developmentally physical and mental anomaly in gifted children; one that differs exponentially, the higher the level of giftedness. These same neuroscientists have found that the gifted brain is physically different than that of the average person. It is both larger and contains more connective white matter; the neuro-strands in the brain that connect each element of the brain to another. In layman’s terms, this means that the gifted brain has a greater capacity to embed and distribute information. In addition, that distribution occurs at a more rapid pace than the average person. Implications for the classroom are many. For instance, the gifted child requires rapid pacing within instruction to be able to function at a proper cognitive level. That same child needs learning to be both complex and varied with an emphasis on depth, breadth, and intricacy. To put this into context; given the opportunity, the gifted learner could conceivably begin high school after 5 or 6 years of comprehensive educational access, thereby rendering the current system, one that requires nine years of instruction to ensure high school readiness, obsolete. The societal and educational implications are enormous. From a societal standpoint, we have an untapped potential of persons who, given access to appropriate educational settings, just might apply those gifts toward some of the greatest problems plaguing our planet. Problems such as the unequal distribution of resources, emerging infectious diseases, violence, climatic ship, and much more. From an educational standpoint, the concept of building the system of learning comedy for thet gifted student is hard to imagine or even comprehend. From an educational standpoint, the traditional environment cannot come close to meeting this child’s potential and is almost unusable to the highly gifted student. This system, an age-defined, lockstep, antiquated approach to education characterized by a fairly rigid curriculum, is not and cannot accommodate the needs of the highly advanced learner. In addition, the current teaching population remains inadequately trained to educate, feed, and cultivate this unique learner. A brief examination of coursework required of the collegiate level preservice teachers speaks loudly to this glaring deficit. Very little guidance in the area of gifted education, if any, is required of new teachers to complete a license in the field of education. Paired with the fundamental lack of district professional development, and the lack of state funding for gifted education, there remains a scarcity of knowledge and/or willingness to accommodate for the needs of the gifted child. This dilemma pushes highly gifted students into a state of alienation as described by author Stephanie Tolan. They are ‘stuck in another dimension’ (Tolan, 1985); one wherein the disengaged highly gifted child participates in the act of schooling, rather than in the act learning; a reality that may propel the gifted child to develop negative attitudes towards education, leading to systematic underachievement, nonproduction, isolation, frustration, negative behaviors, and a general loss of interest in the ‘game’ of schooling.

Another common trait amongst the high is uncommon ingenuity. In-born cleverness with which the gifted child can detect underlying elements and patterns of relationships, ideas and multifaceted structures. Combined with their ability to understand and synthesize a broad range of opinions and ideas in abstract terms, the highly gifted child can be envisioned as a different kind of learner. Furthermore, an unrelenting drive for intellectual curiosity, especially in areas of interest, is common amongst the highly gifted population. In layman’s terms, this means that the highly gifted individual can quickly detect meeting and patterns relating to the curriculum; unravel, synthesize, and apply that information; and draw conclusions at a rapid pace, turning a single lesson into a multilayer system of inquiry and exploration that can last for hours at a time, when given the opportunity. The regular classroom, or even one that is highly differentiated, is generally not equipped to handle such a divergent learning process. In general, teaching is based on conceptual block building, informed by small caches of curriculum, taught at a pace that ensures all learners will meet the desired learning goals. Then, and only then, can the instructor move forward to introduce a new concept or idea. Indeed, this should be the goal of the classroom teacher. However, within this common scenario, the highly gifted student is often left waiting for the rest of the students to catch up. The gifted child, bestowed with extreme advanced high order thinking skills, has made logical leaps and connections within the lesson and may not only find herself far ahead of the class, but also a very different conclusion. As the scenario repeats itself day in and day out, we can begin to perceive why the highly gifted child might be alienated from the regular classroom; isolated and even, in a state of perpetual depression.

Additional attributes of the gifted child are their unusual capacity for memory. This memory, accompanied by a long concentration span (this may be unusual in twice exceptional learners who generally tend to come from the ranks of the highly gifted), accounts for the vast deposits of information that may reside within the child’s bank of knowledge. Gifted students use their intellectual curiosity to pursue in-depth investigations into topics or issues that they find interest in. It is not unusual to find the gifted child spending countless hours engaged in a project that consumes them to the point of ignoring basic and necessary life functions such as eating, drinking, socializing, or even sleeping. This prolonged intellectual engagement may seemingly display illogical twists and turns, and often leaves the end result doubt; a puzzle to the untrained eye. However, this dogged pursuit of intellectual knowledge is often the goal, rather than the result. To the highly gifted child it is the joy of curiosity and the pursuit of knowledge that is as important, or perhaps even more significant, than the product. Certainly, the knowledgeable teacher will understand this and encourage the development of small achievable goals to push the gifted child towards an outcome. In the current age of standardization assessment, it seems the goal of production outweighs the process. Indeed, it is the foremost motto of any capitalist society; to produce; an ideal that is not lost in the educational system which finds itself devoured by standardized assessment. The highly gifted mind just does not work this way. Production is merely a means to survival. It is the drive to be curious, to engage in exploration and wonder that resonates with the gifted child much more than the shallow nature of humanistic greed; a fundamental gift that leaves her at odds with schools driven by societal norms. Likewise, the lock and step approach to instruction within the average school aimed at standardized achievement does not allow for a prolonged, in-depth investigation, pockmarked with logical leaps, fits and starts, periods of contemplation, multiple pathways, and precision. Even the most progressive classroom would struggle to comply with this style of learning, let alone allow it to ensue on a regular basis and, once again, it is the highly gifted child who remains on the outside looking in.

Accompanying the need for a sensible reality, is the gifted student's advanced degree of emotional sensitivity complemented by an extraordinary code of ethical behavior, unusual intensity, and a deep understanding of compassion. Polish psychologist, Kazimierz Dabrowski’s ground breaking work in ‘positive disintegration; a theory that postulates the schematic disintegration of the gifted child when faced with the reality of existence within an alien world, theorizes that children at both ends of the intellectual spectrum are apt experience over-excitability, or intense sensitivity to their surrounding environments. Combined with a powerful internal drive, the child formulates what Dabrowski calls, the ‘developmental potential’ of a person. Gifted education professional, Sharon Lind, summarizes the theory in this way:

“Over-excitabilities are inborn intensities indicating a heightened ability to respond to stimuli. Found to a greater degree in creative and gifted individuals, overexcitabilities are expressed in sensitivity, awareness, and intensity, and represent a real difference in the fabric of life quality experience.” (Lind, 2001)

It is not unusual for gifted students to be deeply affected by the events that surround and shape their world. In an age of increasing uncertainty, fueled by national and global destabilization easily accessed through multiple media outlets, the gifted child is continually being bombarded by sensitive information that can affect the psychological well-being of the student in a myriad of ways, from a resolve that might drive the child to participate in making a difference, to an apathetic paralysis, defined by a sense of aimless hopelessness. Whatever the degree, the gifted individual must learn to cope at an early age with the burden of living in an unruly, dishonest, and often barbaric world. It is no secret that many gifted individuals, burdened by sensitivity, have made the adjustments to overcoming hopelessness and depression to make significant global contributions. Famous intellectuals such as Martin Luther King Jr., Stephen Hawking, Marie Curie, and many others come to mind. It is also unfortunate that others succumbed to this intense disintegration, ending their lives before their due time. Prolific authors Virginia Woolf and Ernest Hemingway serve as examples of this. I have also been personally acquainted with such tragedy in my tenure working with highly gifted children. The implications for the classroom are enormous. The sense of personal and communal security embedded in the classroom is an essential piece to learning for all students and imperative for the gifted child. A phenomenological research study conducted by P Susan Jackson (Jackson, 1995) in the mid-1990s on highly gifted adolescents highlights this need. In this study, it was found that due, in part, to their profound sensitivity, sense of failure, and the shame that accompanied their inability to “fix themselves, highly gifted students difficult reduced had reduced capacity for mental functioning in the areas of synthesis, processing, and delayed reactivity, which served hinder their usual exceptional problem-solving capabilities” (Jackson & Peterson, 2003). Furthermore, Jackson noted that the same individuals had the capacity to hide their symptoms and thus remained undiagnosed. This begs the question, how many other highly gifted individuals, suffering from some sort of affective disorder, are populating our schools, undetected, misidentified, untreated? Perhaps the most important lesson to be learned is the necessity to embed social/emotional instruction into our schools with the object of teaching self-awareness and/or coping mechanisms to gifted students. To be sure, it is rare to find such social emotional instruction or curriculum designated to assist the gifted child in the traditional classroom.

Another common feature that might alienate gifted children in the regular classroom is their tendency towards argumentativeness and stubbornness. This delightful mannerism, coupled with an extreme sense of justice, can become a disturbance within the classroom and can be particularly magnified by the gifted student’s conviction that their own interpretation of ideas and beliefs are always correct. Incidentally, they usually are. One can only envision the chaos that may ensue, when a particularly knowledgeable student challenges the system. In the ensuing battle for control, it is the student that loses, inevitably leading to further alienation and disillusionment with schooling. Further evidence for significant changes to the education of the highly gifted child.

So how might one employ best practices and methodologies for educating the Highly gifted student? And, who is best fit to undertake this task?

The most important element in the education of the highly gifted child is the classroom teacher. Regardless of the type of programming in place, it is the responsibility of the classroom teacher to deliver engaging instruction, build a trusting relationship, assess student growth, and accommodate when necessary. The late John Feldhusen, former professor of education at Purdue University, and the creator of its Creative Thinking Program, believed that any teacher employed within a gifted program, especially those working with highly gifted students, must be gifted themselves. “Teachers of the gifted should be gifted. This aids in understanding and communication” (Davis & Rimm, 1998). Who better understands the educational needs of a gifted child than the teacher who was personally experienced at one time, living and breathing within the traditional school system? Who better to understand this unique child, than one who has lived under the same cloud of misunderstanding and survived to tell the tale. Leta Hollingsworth, suggested that the two most desirable traits the teacher the gifted are ones that firstly, are knowledgeable about the needs of the student both educationally and effectively, and secondly, able to conceive themselves as a facilitator of knowledge rather than the bearer of wisdom (Colangelo and Davis, 1991). In addition, other theorists in the field of gifted education have postulated on the desirable teacher competencies needed to teach the gifted child. Hultgren and Seeley (1982), as well as Nelson and Prindle (1992), reported the following teacher qualities based on their surveys of gifted and talented teachers and students. These qualities, in no particular order, are high intelligence, engagement in high intellectual pursuits, adherence to excellence and achievement, an enthusiasm for talent, compatibility with talented people, and a broad base of knowledge. Feldhusen (1997), adds the following characteristics; confidence and maturity, facilitator of learning, adaptability to various points of view, organized but flexible, innovative, responsible to individual children, nonjudgmental, able to teach self-assessment, a continued appetite for learning, skilled in counseling, facilitator of independent research, as well as, an aptitude for teaching higher order thinking skills. There may not be a teacher on earth that encapsulates all these qualities, however, the point being that, in the process of hiring teachers for gifted learners, and in particular, highly gifted learners, a close examination of potential teacher attitudes and credentials is required. Failure to do so may result in an unfavorable, perhaps even unpleasant relationship between both teacher, student, and the students’ family.

If quality instructors are an integral part to the ideal educational programming of the highly gifted child, of equal importance is curriculum and pedagogy. Consequently, it is critical to develop appropriate programming that will promote the understanding, development, and proliferation of their extraordinary gifts. Given the evidence presented earlier in regards to the extraordinary characteristics and needs of the highly gifted student, this task should not be taken lightly. Undeniably, it is comprehensible that a completely different type of program must be designed in order to achieve this task. A program that is flexible, fluent, rich in resources, multifaceted, interest driven, compacted, and perhaps, most importantly, accelerated. And one that is defined by independent individualization of instruction and accommodation of unique needs. Indeed, a program that is both comprehensive in terms of accessibility to a variety of educational domains, and characterized by continual formative assessment that enables the classroom teacher to better understand the educational path of each and every student, is a program that is ideal. Of equal importance is the type classroom setting. A classroom characterized by intellectual homogeny should be a prerequisite. By this I mean a separate, singular environment catering specifically to the highly gifted child. Such a setting fosters in-depth explorations, intense discussion, collaborative instruction, and a safe environment in which the children can express themselves. Four research studies conducted by James and Chen-Lin Kulik (Kulik, 1985; Kulik and Kulik, 1982; 1984; 1990) have shown that large-scale academic gains across all subject areas have been found when gifted learners are placed in full-time programs. Kulik and Kulik, recommend this model and state unequivocally that this type of environment may be the only setting in which the highly gifted child is able to achieve her greatest potential. This dynamic setting reduces the risk of underachievement and eliminates the social and emotional isolation of the gifted child from grade level peers. Mirica Gross, a professor of gifted education in Australia author and scholar, studied the factors influencing the social adjustment and acceptability of high gifted children in the traditional public school setting. Her findings suggest the need for specialized programming in support of the highly gifted child:

“The results of this study suggest that whereas ability grouping with age-peers, or a moderate degree of acceleration, or a combination of these and other intervention procedures may be an appropriate response to the academic and social needs of moderately gifted students, they are not adequate to the needs of the exceptionally and profoundly gifted. Extremely gifted students require a carefully designed and monitored program of radical acceleration, linked to ability grouping, and individualized instruction. Keeping them with age peers is not the way to ‘socialize’ these children. If we isolate them from true peers (intellectual peers) in the heterogeneous classroom we place them in the position of being the one-eyed man in the country of the blind who, far from being king, is feared and ostracized because he has vision or, perhaps because of what he can see.” (Gross, 1994)

I would argue that almost all gifted children can benefit from specialized instructional environments although it is the highly gifted that could truly benefit from such a program. Dorothy Kennedy’s study of a highly gifted nine-year-old boy within a heterogeneous classroom environment supports this type of model:t

“If highly gifted students are defined as both academic and social success, it seems clear that asynchronous development must receive attention. Individual education plans must be developed to provide clear goals and direction for both cognitive and affective areas. Classroom teachers, gifted education specialists, the student, parents, and guidance counselors or school psychologist should all be involved in the process. Contracts or other strategies can provide useful structure. They must be flexible enough to allow for new interests as they develop, and they should consider out-of-setting opportunities such as work with a mentor or participation in after-school or Saturday programs in the universities or museums.” (Kennedy, 2002)

Are we willing? Are we able? What type of catalyst is needed to recognize that the gifted child merits an educational system designed to meet their specific learning needs? Perhaps, even more importantly, how long will we wait before acting to address the glaring lack of comprehensive educational alternatives necessary to provide an acceptable and beneficial setting for our highly gifted children? When will we begin to treat them as equals, rather than educational pariahst? If we are truly a society that cares for the needs of our children; if we truly believe that no child should be left behind, we then have the ethical and moral obligation to act; to build programs that can accommodate the holistic needs of all students regardless of their ability. We must adjust our educational standards to accommodate the needs of all our children, not just those that fit the mold of traditional educational expectations. If we continue on the pathway of ignorance we will all face the consequences of losing yet another generation of our nation’s most precious resource. We will all be stuck in the dimension of societal mediocrity.

References:

Colangelo, N. & Davis, G. A (1997). Handbook of Gifted Education (2^nd ed.) Boston: Bacon & Allyn.

Dahlberg, W. (1992). Brilliance-The Childhood Dilemma of Unusual Intellect. Roeper Review, 15 (7).

Davis, G. A. & Rimm, S. B. (1998). Education of the Gifted and Talented. Boston: Bacon & Allyn.

Dabrowski, K. (1964). Positive Disintegration. Boston: Little Brown & Co.

Dabrowski, K. (1967). Personality-Shaping Through Positive Disintegration. Boston: Little Brown & Co.

Feldhusen, J. F. (1997). Educating Teachers for Work with Talented Youth. In, Colangelo, N. & Davis, G. A. Handbook for Gifted Education (2^nd ed.) Boston: Bacon & Allyn.

Gross, M. (1994). Small Poppies: Highly Gifted Children in the Early Years. Roeper Review, 21 (3).

Hollingsworth, L. S. (1926). Gifted Children. Their Nature and Nurture. New York: Macmillan.

Hollingsworth, L. S. (1942). Children Above !Q 180. New York: World Books.

Hultgren, H. W. & Seeley, K. R. (1982). Training Teachers of the Gifted: A Research Monograph on Teacher Competencies. Denver: University of Denver School of Education.

Jackson P. S. (1995). Bright Star, Black Sky: Origins and Manifestations of the Depressed State in the Lived Experiences of the Gifted Adolescent. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Vermont College, Norwich University.

Kennedy, D. M. (2002). Glimpses of a Highly Gifted Child in a Heterogeneous Classroom. Roeper Review, 24 (3).

Kline, B. E. & Meckstroth, E. A. (1985). Understanding and Encouraging the Exceptionally Gifted. Roeper Review, 24 (3).

Kulik, J. A. & Kulik, C. C. (1990). Ability Grouping and Gifted Students. In Colangelo, N. & Davis, G. A. (1991). Handbook of Gifted Education. Boston: Bacon & Allyn.

Kulik, C. C. (1985). Effects of Inter-class Ability Grouping on Achievement and Self Esteem. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Ontario, Canada.

Kulik, C. C. & Kulik, J. A. (1984). Effects of Ability Grouping on Elementary School Pupils: A Meta-analysis. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Ontario, Canada.

Kulik, J. A. & Kulik, C. C. (1984). Effects of Accelerated Instruction on Students. Review of Educational Research, 54 (409-425).

Kulik, J. A. & Kulik, C. C. (1982). Effects of Ability Grouping on Secondary School Students: A Meta-analysis of Evaluation Findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19 (415-428).

Lind, S. (2001). Overexcitability and the Gifted. SENG Newsletter, 1 (1).

Lovecky, D. V. (1994). Exceptionally Gifted Children: Different Minds. Roeper Review, 17 (2).

Nelson, K. C. & Prindle, N. (1992). Gifted Teacher Competencies: Ratings by Rural Principals and Teachers Compared. Journal for the Education of the Gifted. 15 (357).

Pringle, M. L. K. (1970). Able Misfits. London: Longman.

Rogers, K. B. (1993). Grouping the Gifted and Talented: Questions and Answers. Roeper Review, 16 (1).

Silverman, L. K. (1989). The Highly Gifted. In Feldhusen, J., Van Tassel-Baska, J., & Seeley, K. (eds.), Excellence in Educating the Gifted. Denver: Love Publishing.

Processing Speed is a complex variable, especially for highly gifted and twice-exceptional children. Due to atypical neuro-development, these individuals experience asynchronous growth characterized by intense epigenetic signatures (sensory prints) and a delayed (but intense, and easily overwhelmed) Limbic System. Some refer to this as Hyper Body, Hyper Mind. In short, these children intake and process information in a very different manner than their more typical peers that, in turn, influences perceptions of processing speed as measured both by formalized assessment and, in a more nuanced manner, by daily requirements placed on children by institutionalized systems such as schools, social norms, and even the work place. Furthermore, parental expectations can run contrary to how children g/2e children process and manipulate information, especially if the parent is unfamiliar with neuro-diverse patterns of development. As a result, many of these children and teens become frustrated, anxious, or even angry and may react negatively when labels and expectations of performance are placed upon them. So, what is the issue? We know that processing speed can be characteristically low for highly gifted and 2e children, but why?

Let’s first take a brief look at what processing speed is and how it is measured.

Processing Speed is determined by a composite analysis measuring the following: the ability to quickly and correctly scan (not all of us are visual learners), sequence, and/or discriminate visual information. Included in this composite are implications for short-term visual memory, attention, and a measure called graphomotor processing which is both the mechanical and visual perceptual processes of correctly scanning and organizing visual information. Yes, a bit of a mouthful but if you think about the way processing speed is measured, you may better understand why, for highly gifted or 2e children displaying traits of hyper body/hyper mind, there are a number of triggers associated with the measurement:

1. Intense minds (especially those with ADD or ADHD or similar symptoms) may struggle with 'sluggish cognitive tempo' due to distractibility and poor executive functioning needed for focus and planning. This can also impair 'activation' or the ability to organize their time, schedule, or calendar. It is a type of inertia that is also influenced by a reluctance to do the work (especially if it is perceived as busy work or uninteresting), uncertainty of the directives, anxiety, frustration, or even boredom. Generally, tasks associated with processing speed do not require deep thought, contemplation, or higher order thinking skills that can engage the child. Rather, they require concentration and effort which may not always be present. So, as a result, processing speed scores can be artificially deflated and may not always be the best indicator of how these children intake and store information.

2. In most cases, processing speed assessments require a ‘paper and pencil’ to complete these sections of the test. Many G/2e children dislike using a pencil or may struggle with pencil coordination that, once again, will slow them down. Within the WISC-V, processing speed is determined by two subtests: Coding and Symbol Search. For children with fine motor (or any of the above issues) will struggle with these assessments as they require pencil to paper tasks and rapid differentiation of abstract symbols

3. Gifted children, especially those that display traits of perfectionism, like to check their work for accuracy and thus may deliberately move slowly to make sure that they are doing things correctly. In timed assessment models, this will reflect poorly on the actual scoring.

4. Processing speed is measured through timed assessments. This does not allow the child to accommodate for any of the above issues or allow them to think through the tasks at hand. Any timed assessment, whether an IQ test or a school assessment puts the highly gifted or 2e child at risk. There are those in the field that find this very troubling as it artificially deflates scores, test results, and, in many cases, prevents the children who need services the most form receiving them.

5. Processing speed is related to immediate recall and I personally theorize that G/2e kids accumulate information rapidly but do not always store that information properly. I call it the messy filing cabinet theory. The material is there, it just takes extra time to organize, recall, and in some cases sift through the varying solutions that arise to come up with the best answer. Before I was admitted to begin my doctoral program, I had to take the Miller’s Analogy Test. This test contains one hundred short analogies which had to be completed in sixty minutes. The first few were quite simple, but as they grew more complex, I began to analyze each answer and was able to make cases for most of the answer choices. I only completed fifty problems. In a similar manner, gifted children can over analyze and thus be unfairly labeled as slow processors when, in fact, they are actually dissecting all the options before making a proper judgement.

6. Processing speed is related to executive functioning. In turn, good executive functioning skills are related to a healthy Limbic System that is not always present in gifted and especially twice-exceptional individuals. Organizing, prioritizing, planning, emotional regulation, structure, and even, language development, stem from the Limbic System and can be related to how one processes information in a timely manner.

7. Processing speed can also be related to visual and auditory processing and in many cases visual and auditory issues are hidden behind the complexity of the twice-exceptional child. Visual Processing Speed can be defined as ‘the amount of time needed to make a correct judgement about a visual stimulus’. For those struggling with visual processing issues, the sensory information that is received through the eyes may be hindered in understanding or interpreting the information the is taken in and can affect how that information is processed and understood. This is not related to the sharpness of one’s vision (although that also can have an affect) but the ability to register, translate, and reproduce that information in a meaningful way. One can only imagine how this can affect the daily requirements of existence. Cleaning one’s room, reading, taking assessments and a myriad of other expectations can become burdensome for a child struggling with visual processing. In a similar fashion, auditory processing may also be an issue. WebMD defines auditory processing disorder as the following:

“People with auditory processing disorder (APD) have a hard time hearing small sound differences in words. Someone says, "Please raise your hand," and you hear something like "Please haze your plan." You tell your child, "Look at the cows over there," and they may hear, ‘Look at the clown on the chair’. Auditory Processing Disorder, also known as central auditory processing disorder, isn't hearing loss or a learning disorder. It means your brain doesn't "hear" sounds in the usual way. It's not a problem with understanding meaning.”

Again, the difficulty in auditory processing artificially slows down the child’s ability to process and manipulate information leading to simple errors that can affect listening and learning. It takes time, flexibility and patience (as well as clear communication: visuals, spacing, color coding, enunciation) to make sure the student understands your intent. The intellectual potential is there, you just have to communicate it properly.

When you encapsulate all these potential issues, you can begin to see why processing speed can be a potential problem for our neuro-diverse children. As they manage the daily requirements of school (timed tests, due dates, multiple classroom assignments, quick question/answer sessions, and the like), or even the expectations set upon them in a variety of social settings, it is not hard to see how they may struggle. In addition, slow processing can cause anxiety, stress, low self-esteem, and the lack of confidence to move forward and tackle new and potentially exciting materials. What then, can be done?

From a societal standpoint we need to reframe our understanding of processing speed. From a standardized assessment perspective, we need to adjust how we assess our G/2e children or how we measure their intellectual potential. I do know that there are groups actively working on this project as we speak. We also need to develop patience/acceptance of how our children think and process information. In a society characterized by ‘immediate gratification’ or ‘immediate response’ we need to slow down and allow our children to think, evaluate, assess, and create. Given the proper time, space, and understanding, I have worked with a number of children who have exhibited an extraordinary talent in ‘rethinking normality’ and creating new visions, ideas, perspectives, and yes, even products. We need to reassess the way schools operate. Do away with timed assessments, busy work, continual repetition, outdated homework policies, etc. and focus on the individual growth of each of our students against individualized standards of potential. This following list chronicles a few strategies that might help both parents and teachers to alleviate and/or remediate the stress of slow processing:

1. Provide clear copies of notes/instructions ahead of time and read them aloud to the student.

2. Provide visuals (pictures, diagrams, index cards, reading strips, highlighters, sticky notes, etc.) whenever possible and give instructions as to what those visuals are asking. For example, for a child struggling to organize his backpack, pictures of what the backpack looks like when it is ready as well as visuals of what needs to go in in (i.e. color-coded folders with large TYPE) can assist them in getting ready for school.

3. Be patient. Listen reflectively. Display empathy, understanding, and maintain a good sense of humor in tough situations.

4. Get rid of timed assessments. Allow the student to process the information at their pace and give them the time and space to blow your mind!

5. Provide undistracted quiet space for learning and assessments.

6. Implement social/emotional curriculum and training on a daily basis both at home and at school. Yes, you can teach executive functioning skills alongside social skills and life skills. You can even work on occupational therapy skills. One suggestion is to review Art Costa and Bena Kallick’s Learning and Leading with Habits of Mind: 16 Characteristics for Success. The book is available at ASCD Press. Another good resource is Bright Kids Who Can’t Keep Up by Dr. Ellen Braaten and Brian Willoughby published by The Guilford Press.

7. Establish and maintain clear routines for increased efficiency. Twice-exceptional individuals need a sense of order to feel safe and productive. In some cases, this sense of order can become obsessive, but it is essential for 2e children (and even adults).

8. Model behaviors. Whether you are aware of it or not, your children are always watching and listening. They take their cues from you and if you are stressed or angry due to the difficulty in dealing with slow processing, they will become anxious and stressed. Coping is difficult enough without having to deal with stressed adults in the room whether you are a parent or teacher.

9. Challenge them to develop creative solutions/techniques to alleviate issues with processing speed.

10. Parents need to be on the same page in how you support your child. In addition, parent-teacher alliances are essential for success. It takes a village.

Finally, as parents, teachers, and caregivers, we need to continually advocate for our precious cargo by teaching them metacognition, self-advocacy, communication skills, character development, executive functioning skills, resilience, and yes, even a little personal interference, if needed (not drone parenting).

Dr. Michael Postma

President, Gifted and Thriving, LLC.

Dr. Mike can be reached at mpost97@gmail.com or www.giftedandthriving.com

One need only browse the ongoing, and often heated, debate surrounding such issues as the implementation of the Common Core or whether or not Creationism should be taught in public schools. Indeed, the subject of teaching the next generation is a delicate one and a matter of immense importance to one and all. In amongst the most heated of educational debates we find the issue of homework. How much homework is too much? What should homework look like? Why do some teachers give more than others? Is homework a catalyst for stress in children? Is homework even necessary? Will students succeed without it? While the matter of homework will always produce a litany of opinion, it still demands honest answers based on knowledgeable experience as well as an examination of the meta-analytical research dedicated to the matter. My goal for this article is to provide a little of both.

As a former teacher (I landed my first gig as a private school substitute teacher in 1989 while still attending college), administrator, author, presenter, and consultant, I have been involved in almost every aspect of public education for quite some time. I have been in the classroom as both a teacher and administrator, spent many an evening participating in District wide School Board meetings, worked closely with parents and have worked as an educator in three states and one provincial setting. In addition, I have seen four children, two with special needs, through the national education system. These experiences have given me much insight into the issue of homework, its pros, its cons, and its effect on children, families, and schools. Homework is a matter of great importance to all and deserves closer examination.

To be sure, I am not a fan of the type of homework currently employed by many of our schools on a national, or even international, scale. What I mean is that, from what I have witnessed as both an educator and parent of four, homework comes in two forms. The most common type of homework is repetitive ‘busy’ work. This busy work can be characterized by endless pages of repetition in the form of 50 linear math problems or page upon page of copied definitions, or, in the case of the History class, dates, facts, and names. The other type can be found in the form of large projects; yes, those shoe box habitats or decked out poster borders that drive parents crazy. This type of homework usually comes with an extra dose of parental involvement due to the procrastination of the disorganized teen or pre-teen. In either case, these two categories of homework have little pedagogical value serving only to tax our already stressed out children.

Alfie Kohn (2006), a noted researcher and author known for his forthright approach to addressing educational issues, asserts that there are no proofs that support the common practice of giving daily homework. In his book, The Homework Myth: Why our kids get too much of a bad thing, Kohn denounces the practice with strong language. “Homework is all pain and no gain,” Kohn declares. In fact, he believes that it actually can be detrimental to student achievement. I believe that he is referring to the above practice of meaningless homework which, indeed, causes more stress and anxiety than it does benefit the acquisition of skills and knowledge.

In my work with hundreds of students, many of who fall in the twice-exceptional category (kids having high intellectual potential and a disability such as Aspergers or ADD who already struggle with the school work load), and my own four children, I have rarely come across meaningful homework. Meaningful homework being those assignments that are natural extensions to given lessons or, complimentary assignments that seek to further unveil issues and/or problems requiring learning skills beyond basic comprehension. Too often, I have encountered homework assignments that exasperate both the student and parent. Why is it that a child must complete fifty double-digit multiplication problems when they can show mastery of that skill in four or five? In essence, that is busy work that serves no purpose other than to further tax the already overloaded child. Why is it that the student is required to sit for hours at the kitchen table writing endless definitions or memorize endless facts and figures? How is cutting and pasting googled information onto some poster board teach my son the intricacies of the Emancipation Proclamation or spur his analysis of it’s controversial nature? And why must my thirteen-year-old seventh grader spend three to four hours each evening completing homework for each of her seven classes? It is this type of homework, unplanned, haphazard, non-stimulating, and heavy in volume that can drive both the student and the parent to the point of irritation. Let’s end this madness and campaign for more deliberate and meaningful homework that can and will extend classroom learning for the benefit of our children because there is a reason and purpose for homework.

While Kohn and others continue to crusade for the end of homework there are ways to give homework that can be beneficial to both students and teachers. Indeed, there have been a few studies including two large meta-analytical studies (Cooper, 1989 & Cooper, Robinson, & Patall, 2006) that have found that homework can have benefits for students. In both studies, the relationship between homework and achievement was statistically positive. Even so, they also decry the lack of teacher training in how to give appropriate homework and warn against too much homework being given. So what it the happy median? What strategies can both teachers and parents use to make sure that homework is constructed and delivered in a manner that benefits students?

There are strategies, if employed on a consistent and comprehensive manner that can enhance classroom learning. My first recommendation, as stated above, is that homework be well planned and meaningful in nature. Here are a few questions a teacher can ask during the planning stage of any unit: Does the homework assignment extend the learning for that particular day? Is it tiered in a way that allows the student to advance her understanding of the skill or concept? Does the assignment meet the particular needs of the child? We know that students learn at different paces and in different ways. Is that reflected in the homework? Have I coordinated homework assignments with my fellow teachers (secondary) to ensure that the student body is not overloaded? Are there certain days within the school week that you know a large number of your students have extra-curricular activities? Are you communicating properly with your parent body agreed upon expectations for homework? Do your students’ parents understand the skills and concepts that are being taught and assigned as homework? As an administrator I have heard from many frustrated parents that feel they cannot actively engage with their kids because they simply do not understand the assignment. An online homework guide for parents can do wonders to alleviate that angst. Are you flexible enough to recognize that a particular student may need extra time when appropriate? Following these simple suggestions will improve both your relationship with your students and enhance their engagement in your classroom. Believe me, your parents will thank you.

Despite the evidence for and against homework it remains a controversial topic within the field of public education. If the prevailing approach to assigning homework in done in thoughtful, well-planned fashion it can be a valuable tool in building student knowledge and understanding of foreign concepts and skills. In addition, it can serve as an effective communication tool between parent and child as they engage the issues together. It can also serve to inform the parent as to what the child is currently learning. However, this is not always the reality. In our era of hyper-accountability teachers are facing increasing pressures to have their students perform. The race to ‘cover the curriculum’ often leads to poor planning and work sheet based instruction and of course, homework for the sake of homework. Isn’t it time to give both our students and teachers a break? I believe it is time to advocate for meaningful learning, meaningful lessons, and of course, meaningful homework.

References:

1. Cooper, H. (1989). Homework. White Plains, NY: Longman.

2. Cooper, H. (1989). Synthesis of Research on Homework. Educational Leadership,

   47(3), 85 (7).

3. Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., & Patall, E. A. (2006). Does Homework Improve Academic

4. Achievement? A Synthesis of Research, 1987-2003. Review of Educational

   Research, 76(1), 1 (63).

5. Kohn, Alfie (2006). The Homework Myth: Why our kids get too much of a bad thing.

   Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press.

https://www.additudemag.com/twice-exceptional-adhd-signs/

“Twice exceptional” (2e) is the term used to describe intellectually gifted children with great potential for academic achievement who also have a learning disability or neurological challenge, like attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD or ADD). Their exceptional intellectual abilities of 2e students are often masked or obscured by one or several conditions (or vice versa), making them one of the least recognized and supported populations.

Twice exceptionality requires special methods of identification and targeted educational supports that highlight a child’s strengths. Parents can help a twice exceptional teen and other 2e students by researching common characteristics, understanding how 2e brains excel, and learning how to uniquely support their needs in the classroom.

Twice Exceptional Students: Common Characteristics

The intellectual potential of twice exceptional youth is great. At the same time, they have an enduring disability or disorder that inhibits their learning experience. Common co-existing conditions include:

• ADHD

• Autism spectrum disorder (ASD)

• Learning disabilities (dyslexia, dyscalculia, dysgraphia, etc.)

• Sensory processing disorder (SPD)

• Emotional and behavioral disorders

• Physical disabilities

Their intellectual capabilities typically mean that 2e children often exhibit:

• rapid learning

• strong memories

• large vocabularies

• advanced comprehension of nuances

• strong curiosity

• unusual emotional depth

• divergent thinking

As a result, 2e children are often highly creative, hold varied and intense interests, exhibit sharp problem-solving skills, and have a sophisticated sense of humor.

But 2e children also tend to struggle with:

• social interactions

• inconsistent performance

• disorganization

• executive dysfunction

• transitions/initiative

• fatigue

In the classroom, twice exceptional children may perform both above and below average on different scales. Their intellectual gifts may overshadow their struggles, or vice versa – a dynamic that explains why identifying these children is so difficult. What’s more, if their intellectual gifts and deficits are left unaddressed, 2e children can experience anxiety, stress, extreme sadness, and feelings of underachievement.

[Click to Read: Unlocking the Potential of Gifted Kids with ADHD]

Twice Exceptional Children: Brain Development

Research shows that the 2e brain, not accounting for any particular condition, is meta-physiologically different from a neurotypical brain. Twice exceptional brains generally tend to:

• be physically larger

• have more connectivity – the white matter within the brain is denser, meaning more connections and storing of information. Sensory intake capacity is also greater.

• be “over-excitable” – emotions are more intense because the limbic system, the part of the brain thought to be responsible for emotion and other processes, is overloaded by increased sensory input (as a result of denser white matter) and the development of intense epigenetics, or sensory prints, as the brain builds knowledge based on various environmental stimuli.

The increased demands on the limbic system may explain why many 2e children have the same struggles and asynchronous development paths – their social-emotional growth is typically delayed, but their intellectual growth is accelerated.

Twice Exceptional: Signs and Identification

The process for identifying a 2e child often starts at home, even before school starts. Parents who suspect their children may be twice exceptional should first:

• Stop to reflect on the child’s behaviors. Some parents detect differences early on, like how their child plays, communicates, behaves, or responds compared to other children. Twice exceptionality tends to be characterized by major disparities in skill, like completing complex tasks and struggling with easier, simpler tasks.

• Look. Observe what happens when the child is struggling (and not) and consider the settings where struggles arise. Question what factors seem to be at play, and whether the child may be compensating for a deficit. Know that some 2e kids learn to camouflage their condition early on, tricking parents and even schools. Use a journal to document observations – the sooner, the better.

• Listen to what the child says about themselves and their struggles. True listening, especially for young children, may require more interpreting than anything else, as they might lack the vocabulary to accurately describe their challenges. Using a “word wall” – a list of varying words to convey emotions – can help children be more exact.

[Read This: Twice-Exceptional and Thriving — At Last]

2e Assessment Steps

Psychologists administer varying multi-section intellectual assessments, like the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-V) and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, when attempting to identify twice exceptionality. The specialist analyzes and interprets results, then provides recommendations and/or further testing. Testing is common when the child reaches school age.

In many cases, 2e children tend to have significantly different scores across assessment sections. These disparities and inconsistencies (called discrepancy scoring) typically signal to psychologists where they might go next to narrow in on deficits.

Parents should consider the following in the specialist’s interpretations and recommendations, as well as in the testing experience:

• Signs of anxiety, stress, and/or discomfort. 2e children need to build a trust relationship with their proctor to be relaxed and give their best effort. Breaks are OK, and should be worked into testing if needed.

• A 2e-friendly testing environment so that sensory stimuli does not interfere with concentration (especially true for kids with ADHD). Even the pencil and paper used for testing can be challenging for certain students!

• In some sections, assessors should consider perfectionist tendencies 2e children tend to have that can slow them down in a bid for accuracy.

• Tasks that involve immediate recall may be a struggle for 2e children. 2e children process a great deal of information but it may not be organized sequentially in the brain. It takes time to organize, sort the best response, and deliver the most accurate result.

• Intense minds (especially those with ADD or ADHD or similar symptoms) may struggle with “sluggish cognitive tempo” – if a child is reluctant to engage and do the work, if they find the task boring, or are uncertain of what to do, they may score lower on certain test sections as a result.

• Remember – average scores on sub tests may look normal, but can still represent an area of difficulty, especially in comparison to the child’s strengths

It is absolutely crucial for assessments to be performed by a specialist with experience working specifically with 2e children. There are many nuances when dealing with 2e children, from how the assessment is administered to how the results are interpreted, that may be lost when working with a general specialist. A trusting relationship between specialist and child is needed, so parents should check that the specialist spends time getting to know the child prior to assessment. The nonprofit I’m associated with, SENG (Supporting Emotional Needs of the Gifted), has a directory that lists 2e professionals.

Twice Exceptional: Support & Strategies

Parents play an important role in supporting their 2e children at home and when advocating with the school. A twice exceptional student thrives when their school addresses their deficits but also makes sure they are intellectually challenged. Schools that understand this dual responsibility and provide proper accommodations can help place a 2e child on the path to personal, academic, and social success.

Supports at Home: Advice for Parents

• Know your child. Understand your child’s unique needs, interests, development, strengths, weaknesses, and ways of responding to their surroundings. Observe behaviors at home and at school. Teach your child who they are, how they operate, and why they are different. Do your best not to confuse support with helicopter parenting, as the latter may be detrimental in the long run. Find a support group to help you work through challenges, share ideas, and feel less alone.

• Teach social-emotional intelligence. This area is one of the biggest hurdles for 2e kids. Help your child expand their emotional vocabulary to better express their needs, and seek out healthy friendships (sometimes, intellectual friends are more important than chronological friends).

• Provide resources. Schools offer very little training for teachers on twice exceptionality. To compensate, provide easy-to-find resources, like checklists and pamphlets, to your child’s teachers. Also try to bring a calm presence to any interactions with staff.

School Accommodations: Advice for Educators

2e accommodations may be as informal as providing notes prior to class or permitting doodling or fidgeting to help with focus. Accommodations ultimately come down to knowing how the child’s condition manifests, and valuing strengths and interests over weaknesses.

Some ideas for 2e classroom accommodations include:

• extended time on assessments and assignments (ask for Measures of Academic Progress tests, which are not timed)

• individualized curriculums, created through diagnostic assessments that test their knowledge before and after learning units

• alternative projects, especially if the child can explore concepts through their interests

• assistive technologies (using recording devices, typing rather than writing, learning apps, etc.)

• multimedia resources (such as video lessons over typical lectures)
  Use of thematic instruction that can include the child’s passions or interests

Ben had always been a very alert boy, one who needed little sleep and had eyes that betrayed a deep longing for information. To say he was curious would be an understatement. As a boy, Ben was constantly getting into everything – taking things apart, exploring, sneaking, finding trouble even where trouble could not possibly be found. On this particular fall day, while mom was occupied with the baby, Ben covered his upper torso with marker before dressing himself, shirt on backwards; head through the arm hole; and, of course, no pants. Armed with a small army of rubber snakes, he decided to find the local park. Dog in tow, he jimmied the lock on the back door and made his way to the park about a quarter of a mile away. One frantic hour later, Ben arrived home via the back seat of a police cruiser, thanks in part to the intervention of a Good Samaritan neighbor who had sensed that something was amiss.

We learned, the hard way sometimes (and with much consternation on my part), that dealing with Ben was going to take a little extra. You see, I work in the field of gifted and talented education and, by 2001, already had some experience working with what we have since labeled the twice- or multi-exceptional child. Ben, it turned out, had Asperger’s Syndrome, something that I, the so-called expert, didn’t see in my own child. Nor did I see it in myself. Yet, as we grew up together, I saw and relived my own childhood as a multi-exceptional student through living with, chasing, laughing, lecturing, supporting, admonishing, dragging, and, yes, advocating for Ben.

First Experiences With School As a student in pre-school, Ben refused to play with the other students or engage in whole-class learning, preferring to spend his time exploring and investigating his interest areas.

Flashback: Why doesn’t everyone love Geography?…Why won’t my fourth grade buddies talk to me about the historical implications of Alexander’s conquest of Persia?…I just spent my entire night with a flash light reading about the man…Uh-oh, the teacher is saying something to me…I need to slump down a little farther, perhaps she will see over me…kids are looking at me…shame, panic, anxiety.

Eventually, we pulled him out of pre-school to accommodate his strong desire to remain at home. We discovered that home was his comfort zone and saw that he would struggle (and does so even today) with the transition from that comfort zone to any other place – any place, that is, where he was expected to interact with strangers.

When it was time for kindergarten, I felt that something was amiss as I witnessed a school administrator give Ben a timed, kindergarten readiness exam. Hood pulled over his head, Ben answered some of the educator’s questions in a whisper and simply refused to respond to others. “He knows these answers,” I screamed in my head. “Why won’t he say anything?” Every now and then he peaked out at me with a look of pure fear.

Flashback: Something is knocking at the back of my brain…a memory perhaps…testing, testing, testing…anxiety, blankness…failing.

Ben was formally admitted to this private school, but with some apprehension. All seemed well until later that fall. Much of the work coming home either had large ”incomplete” or ”unsatisfactory” labels stamped on them or what appeared to be oceans of red ink, while most of his classmates’ papers were covered with smiley face stickers and pluses. We waited in trepidation for the first parent/teacher conference. His teacher was concerned. Ben didn’t seem to be paying attention; and, while not a behavior problem, he wasn’t ”up-to-speed.” He also refused to speak. Perhaps, I thought to myself at that time, there isn’t much interesting within the classroom to speak about; but, having learned some social mannerisms through the years, I refrained. Was there something we were missing? Surely the teacher would let us in on the secret. No, she wanted him to apply himself – no suggestions, no solutions, no accommodations, no changes.

Life in kindergarten did not improve for Ben. His absences were up, learning was down, and intervention was nowhere to be found. As the year came to a close, the school announced its intentions to retain Ben. He just wasn’t ready for kindergarten, they said. But he’s six, loves art, and is great with numbers, we countered. He’s just not ready, they stated. But Ben will be seven and still in kindergarten, we started but slowly trailed off. See you next year, they beamed. Good bye, we muttered. Good riddance, whispered Ben. Bad genes, they thought.

How could this have happened? Kindergarten is supposed to be a fun, positive learning experience for children, the launching pad that jump-starts the rest of your life. Now what? “It’s okay, Dad,” Benny ventured. “I really don’t have to go back to school. I think I already know everything I need to know to survive.” I agreed.

What’s In A Name? Our first breakthrough occurred that following summer. In desperation, we spoke with a local public school principal. As we nervously began to tell our tale, expecting the same results, the principal held up her hand. “Have you had Ben tested for Asperger’s?” You’ve got to be kidding me. I have worked with twice-exceptional children before, but my son? Slowly, the plot was unraveling in my mind. How embarrassing it was to have all that education, all that learning, all that practical experience, and not see those traits within my own son.

Flashback: Asperger’s…Asperger’s…his social anxiety, his clumsiness, his apparent reading disability, his intensity, his sensitivity, his mathematical wizardry, his hood….my social mishaps, my intensity, my fanaticism with social sciences, my apparent Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (ask my wife), my lack of empathy…Ben was me and I was Ben, and yet we we’re so different. Asperger’s.

It was starting to come together. Eventually, Ben was given an IEP (Individualized Education Program) based on his reading and speech delays. His anxiety was so high that the autism spectrum disorder testing could never be completed. The IEP, however, did mention the high probability of its existence, based on the numerous symptoms he displayed.

Ben began to improve due to the immense and intense efforts and indescribable caring of his teachers. He made a few friends, generally went to school without a lot of resistance, and even learned to love baseball…well, at least the hitting part. While transitions were still difficult, and the Asperger’s was still prevalent, at the very least Ben was making progress and had formed a close bond with his teacher (who, incidentally, looped the following year into second grade, much to our delight). It takes a special teacher to enjoy, even welcome, the challenges that Ben brought to the classroom.

Moving Forward They say (whoever they are) that all good things must come to an end, and so they did. By mid-March of second grade, Ben’s teacher left on maternity leave; and I think Ben decided to go on leave as well. Despite the heroic efforts of the new teacher, the principal, and numerous others, Ben spent the majority of his days with the social worker or at home. A week into the new teacher’s tenure, Ben began to sob uncontrollably. The intensity of change combined with his penchant for over-excitability completely overwhelmed him. Then we moved.

Flashback: I am sitting at my desk in third grade in anticipation….Phys Ed. was next. I loved sports. It was one thing I excelled at and the kids wanted me on their team. How was I supposed to know that strange kids weren’t supposed to be athletic? “Boys and girls, because you were late coming in from recess and talking in the halls, we will not be going outside for Phys Ed. We are going to write about what we learned from this experience.” My body is beginning to quiver… I can’t think, function…tears, more tears…why am I crying…I’m almost nine.

New house, new city, new school. The first day of school Ben would not get out of bed. Realizing the transition was going to be rough, I allowed him an extra 15 minutes to sleep. The first day of school is always rough especially after a summer filled with catching snakes, building elaborate habitats, and other stimulating activities. This time there was a new school involved as well.

I went back to check on Ben’s progress. Do I pull him out of bed, dress him, carry him to the car, and drag him into school? Or do I use more gentle persuasive tactics? I would recommend the latter, but on this occasion, a little flustered, I chose the former. Within minutes I was chasing Ben through the woods – me in my office clothes, Ben in his underwear and socks.

There were many other days like this before that daily morning ritual began to improve. The remedy? Negotiation and compromise. We worked with Ben’s array of teachers and incorporated into his IEP a ”break day” every few weeks, a day in which he could stay home, explore, relax, and generally release any pent-up anxiety. These break days also worked as a motivational tactic for getting him to school regularly and on time. He also got little breaks on a daily basis within the school day to have some quiet time or release some anxiety through physical activity in the gymnasium or the motor room, another effective intervention to get him through the daily grind.

The Future Is Unwritten Ben is now ten years old and attending a school that not only understands but also goes to extreme measures to make accommodations for the twice-exceptional child, truly rare in the era of modern schooling. Although he struggles with the concept of school, he is making progress, as is his Dad. However, I worry – about puberty, middle school, high school, girls, teachers, drugs, alcohol, relationships, and more. Ben is just beginning the journey. I am about half-way through, and all those obstacles plague my outlook and expectations for Ben. Why? I have experienced them all: the embarrassment of puberty; the inability to socialize with the opposite sex in a normal manner or develop deep relationships with people; the dark memory that is middle school; the compensation of alcohol dependency to mask my social dysfunction; the lack of a true, empathetic, and understanding social support network; a spiritual quest for God that emphasizes relationship (one I had to pursue from an intellectual stand-point that continues to this day); and the deep depressions of not fitting in which lasted for years before I sought medical assistance.

Ben doesn’t know that I struggled through life just as he is struggling. I struggled despite my constant parachute (one that carried me through even the most difficult of times) – athletics. Unfortunately, Ben has yet to find his own personal parachute. So, I wait and I worry and I protect. I also hope – hope that Ben will find a companion, a friend who understands when my wife and I are no longer around. Ben does know that I haven’t always been the greatest father. However, he does understand that I love him dearly and will continue to marvel at his unique thoughts, ideas, and creations, even during moments of challenge and frustration.

Life doesn’t ask us what kinds of kids we want. Neither does it send us an advanced checklist of qualities we would like to see in our children. We must deal with the circumstances that we are given, whether we believe it is fair or not. Would I have changed my makeup, or Benny’s, given the opportunity? Perhaps, I don’t know. However, living with it has forced me to adapt, to persevere, and to develop resiliency skills that continue to assist me to this very day. The field knows much more about students with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) now, than we ever have. I expect that these advances will make life for Benny a little easier to navigate; however, there are no guarantees. So we continue this journey, he and I, and we hope. We hope that tomorrow will bring a kinder, more understanding world – a world that values our abilities and appreciates our shortcomings; a world that accommodates our differences and respects our right to learn at our own pace; a world that laughs with us and not at us; and, perhaps most importantly, a world that allows us to breathe.

________________________________________________________

Dr. Michael Postma is an education consultant specializing in working with non-traditional learners and their families. A father of four children, three of whom are twice-exceptional, Dr. Postma writes, advocates, and speaks for gifted and 2e children at both a national and international level. He can be reached through his website at: www.drmichaelpostma.com

©Michael Postma, 2015

For additional information on the Overexcitabilities that can accompany Asperger’s Syndrome, see the following: Dawbrowski, K. (1964). Positive Disintegration. Boston: Little Brown & Co. Mendaglio, S. (2008). Dawbrowski’s Theory of Positive Disintegration. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press. Daniels, S., & Piechowski, M. M. (Eds.). (2009). Living with intensity: Understanding the sensitivity, excitability, and emotional development of gifted children, adolescents, and adults. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press. Piechowski, M. M. (2006).“Mellow out” they say. If I only could: Intensities and sensitivities of the young and bright.Madison, WI: Yunasa Books.

Subscribe now

My Name is…….

Hi, My name is Dr. Michael Postma. Currently, I run an independent business, alongside my wife Julie, called Gifted & Thriving, LLC. Our mission is to support families, educators, and communities within the realm of gifted and multi-exceptional (commonly called 2e) individuals over a life span. We primarily offer coaching and consulting for families and institutions that support these communities through personal coaching, webinars, seminars, staff development, self-paced workshops, and other means. I have degrees in Classical History (1994) and Education (1996) as well as an Masters in Gifted, Creative, and Talented Education (2000) and a doctorate in Educational Leadership (2012) with an emphasis on Critical Pedagogy. In addition, I began working in the field of gifted education in 1999 and wore many hats including teacher, coordinator, executive director in three different states working with hundreds of students and staff. Beginning in 2006, I began the research and development of a gifted magnet school that began to receive students in 2009. The Minnetonka Navigator Program is still alive and well within the Minnetonka, MN School District. I also was the Executive Director of SENG (Social and Emotional Needs of Gifted), a non-profit for three years before moving to the role of Director of Programming that paralleled the founding of Gifted and Thriving in 2020. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we have raised four multi-exceptional children successfully to adulthood. Each one possessed unique gifts and posed numerous challenges for us, especially during their K-12 years (more about them in upcoming posts). We dealt with Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD), Aspergers Disorder (now high functioning ASD), Sensory Processing Disorder, Chronic Anxiety Disorder, as well as some learning disorders. One common theme amongst all these hurdles was their unique innate intelligence that consistently threw an interesting spin to our advocacy efforts. Needless to say, we moved several times (6 School Districts) attempting to find the appropriate fit for each of them. We never quite succeeded. That constant search will be one of the themes I pursue in this venue. Our youngest is now almost 24 and each of them has become successful in their own way; something I wasn’t sure would occur while we were in the height of the storm(s). I hope you will subscribe and follow upcoming material.

1. Why this, why now

I built an account in Substack a while back but never really got going. Given the end of summer with a new school year beginning, it is time to get out there,

2. What kind of community are you looking to build here

I hope to build a community of both experts and lay persons interested in the field of neurodiversity especially as it pertains to the social, emotional, and educational needs of highly intelligent minds. Many within this population struggle to develop a secure sense of self acceptance as they navigate communities that may not fully understand or accept them. I hope use this space to provide both resources and community for this population.

3. Be specific

My plan is to post something weekly. Tuesday morning is generally a good time for me to write as I do not have clients until the afternoon. In time, I would also like to host a question and answer session on a weekly basis. That information will be determined shortly as we progress.

My Website

Subscribe now