This study presents an exploration of the lived experiences of eight twice-exceptional children through their own voices. The narratives reveal a meta-narrative of stigma where identified contextual factors related to discrimination, perceptions of difference, and stigmatized views of disability, giftedness, and subsequently twice-exceptionality. Eight distinct stigma-related themes emerged from the data and each of these is shared. These narratives provide crucial insights into the daily lives of children living with twice-exceptionality in societies where able-bodied and able-minded norms frequently prevail. The study focuses attention on the omnipresent nature of stigma and the importance of cultivating awareness and understanding about twice-exceptionality to address the unique needs of these children. Moreover, policy and practices can be informed by engaging with these children’s experiences so that their needs can be adequately recognized and addressed.
AssoulineS. G.NicponM. F.WhitemanC. (2009). Cognitive and psychosocial characteristics of gifted students with written language disability. Gifted Child Quarterly, 20, 1–14.
2.
BanduraA. (1971). Social learning theory. New York, NY: General Learning Press.
3.
BarberC.MuellerC. (2011). Social and self-perceptions of adolescents identified as gifted, learning disabled, and twice-exceptional. Roeper Review, 33, 109–120.
BaumS. M.OwenS. V. (2004). To be gifted and learning disabled: Strategies for helping bright students with learning and attentional difficulties. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
6.
BaumS. M.ReisS. M. (2004). Twice-exceptional and special populations of gifted students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
7.
BellL.LongS.GarvanC.BussingR. (2011). The impact of teacher credentials on ADHD stigma perceptions. Psychology in the Schools, 48, 184–197.
8.
Ben-ZeevT.FeinS.InzlichtM. (2005). Arousal and stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 174–181.
9.
BerningerV. (2008). Listening to parents of children with learning disabilities. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 34(5), 22–32.
10.
BoylornR. M. (2008). Lived experience. In GivenL. M. (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 489–490). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11.
ChenC. C.HammJ. V.FarmerT. W.LambertK.MehtajiM. (2015). Exceptionality and peer victimization involvement in late childhood: Subtypes, stability, and social marginalization. Remedial and Special Education, 36, 312–324.
12.
ChenX.RubinK. H.LiD. (1997). Maternal acceptance and social and school adjustment: A four-year longitudinal study. Merrill Palmer Quarterly, 43, 663–681.
13.
ColemanL. J. (2014). The power of specialized educational environments in the development of giftedness: The need for research on social context. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37, 70–80.
14.
ColemanL. J.MickoK. J.CrossT. L. (2015). Twenty-five years of research on the lived experiences of being gifted in school: Capturing the students’ voices. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 38, 358–376.
15.
Commonwealth of Australia. (1988). The education of gifted and talented children: Report by the senate select committee on the education of gifted and talented children. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
CompasB. E. (1987). Stress and life events during childhood and adolescence. Clinical Psychology Review, 7, 275–302.
21.
ConnellyF. M.ClandininD. J. (2006). Narrative inquiry. In GreenJ. L.CamilliG.ElmoreP. (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (3rd ed., pp. 477–487). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22.
CrossT. L.ColemanL. J.Terhaar-YonkersM. (2014). The social cognition of gifted adolescents in schools: Managing the stigma of giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37, 30–39.
23.
CurtisS.GeslerbW.SmithG.WashburnS. (2000). Approaches to sampling and case selection in qualitative research: Examples in the geography of health. Social Science & Medicine, 50, 1001–1014.
24.
DarlingR. B. (2013). Disability and identity: Negotiating self in a changing society. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
25.
EisnerE. W. (1998). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
26.
EllingsonL. L. (2009). Engaging crystallization in qualitative research: An introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27.
FrenchS.SwainJ. (2008). Affirming identity. In FrenchS.SwainJ. (Eds.), Disability on equal terms (pp. 66–78). London, UK: Sage.
28.
FrydenbergE.O’MullaneA. (2000). Nurturing talent in the Australian context: A reflective approach. Roeper Review, 22, 78–85.
29.
GoffmanE. (1963). Stigma and social identity. In GoffmanE. (Ed.), Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity (pp. 1–41). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
30.
GogginG.NewellC. (2005). Disability in Australia: Exposing a social apartheid. Sydney, NSW: University of New South Wales Press.
31.
GrossM. U. M. (1989). The pursuit of excellence or the search for intimacy? The forced-choice dilemma of gifted youth. Roeper Review, 11, 189–194.
InzlichtM.GoodC. (2006). How environments can threaten academic performance, self-knowledge, and sense of belonging. In LevinS.van LaarC. (Eds.), Stigma and group inequality (pp. 129–150). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34.
JungJ. Y.BarnettK.GrossM. U. M.McCormickJ. (2011). Levels of intellectual giftedness, culture, and the forced-choice dilemma. Roeper Review, 33, 182–197.
35.
KimJ. H. (2016). Understanding narrative inquiry: The crafting and analysis of stories as research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36.
KvaleS.BrinkmannS. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37.
LeroD.PletschC.HilbrechtM. (2012). Introduction to the special issue on disability and work: Toward re-conceptualizing the “burden” of disability. Retrieved from http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/3275/3108
38.
LevinS.van LaarC. (2006). Stigma and group inequality. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
39.
LoveckyD. V. (2004). Different minds. London, UK: Jessica Kingsley.
40.
MajorB. (2006). New perspective on stigma and psychological well-being. In LevinS.van LaarC. (Eds.), Stigma and group inequality: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 193–210). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
41.
MartinJ.MerrotsyP. (2006). Portfolio of artefacts: Promising data for qualitative research. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 15(1), 39–43.
42.
McLarenS. J. (2008). Noise in early childhood education centres: The effects on the children and their teachers (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand. Retrieved from https://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/977
43.
McLarenS. J.PageW. H. (2015). Noise and the implications for children with autism spectrum disorder in mainstream education. Austin Journal of Neurological Disorders & Epilepsy, 2, 1009–1015.
44.
MertonR. K. (1948). The self-fulfilling prophecy. Antioch Review, 8, 193–210.
45.
MillerC. T. (2006). Social psychological perspectives on coping with stressors related to stigma. In LevinS.van LaarC. (Eds.), Stigma and group inequality: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 21–44). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
46.
NicponM. F.AllmonA.SieckB.StinsonR. D. (2011). Empirical investigation of twice-exceptionality: Where have we been and where are we going?Gifted Child Quarterly, 55, 1–15.
47.
NicponM. F.AssoulineS. G.ColangeloN. (2013). Twice-exceptional learners: Who needs to know what?Gifted Child Quarterly, 57, 169–180.
48.
NielsenM. E.HigginsL. D. (2005). The eye of the storm: Service and programs for twice-exceptional learners. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(1), 8–15.
49.
O’NeillM.CalderA.AllenB. (2014). Tall poppies: Bullying behaviors faced by Australian high-performance school-age athletes. Journal of School Violence, 13, 210–227.
50.
PeetersB. (2004). Thou shalt not be a tall poppy: Describing an Australian communicative (and behavioral) norm. Intercultural Pragmatics, 1(1), 71–92.
51.
PetersonJ. S.DuncanN.CanadyK. (2009). A longitudinal study of negative life events, stress, and school experiences in gifted youth. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53, 34–49.
52.
PosnerJ. (1976). The stigma of excellence: On being just right. Sociological Inquiry, 46, 141–144.
53.
QuinnD. M. (2006). Concealable versus conspicuous stigmatized identities. In LevinS.van LaarC. (Eds.), Stigma and group inequality: Social psychology perspectives (pp. 83–104). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
54.
ReisS. M.BaumS. M.BurkeE. (2014). An operational definition of twice-exceptional learners: Implications and applications. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58, 217–230.
55.
ReisS. M.McCoachD. B. (2002). Underachievement in gifted and talented students with special needs. Exceptionality, 10, 113–125.
56.
RiessmanC. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
57.
RobinsonM. (1992). A vision splendid: Gifted education in Australia. Roeper Review, 14, 206–208. doi:10.1080/02783199209553431
58.
Ronksley-PaviaM. (2015). A model of twice-exceptionality: Explaining and defining the apparent paradoxical combination of disability and giftedness in childhood. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 38, 318–340.
59.
Ronksley-PaviaM. (2016). The lived experiences of twice-exceptional children: Narratives of disability and giftedness (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Griffith University, Queensland, Australia.
60.
Ronksley-PaviaM.GrootenboerP. (2017). Insights into disability and giftedness: Narrative methodologies in interviewing young people identified as twice-exceptional. In DwyerR.EmeraldE.DavisI. (Eds.), Storied worlds: Diverse case studies of narrative research (pp. 183–207). Singapore: Springer.
61.
Ronksley-PaviaM.GrootenboerP.PendergastD. (2019). Bullying and the unique experiences of twice-exceptional learners: Students perspective narratives. Gifted Child Today, 42, 19–35.
62.
SaxtonM. (2000). Why members of the disability community oppose prenatal diagnosis and selective abortion. In ParensE.AschA. (Eds.), Prenatal testing and disability rights (pp. 147–164). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
SchmaderT.LickelB. (2006). Stigma and shame: Emotional responses to the stereotypic actions of one’s ethnic group. In LevinS.van LaarC. (Eds.), Stigma and group inequality: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 261–285). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
65.
SchwandtT. A.DenzinN. K. (1994). Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In LincolnY. S. (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 118–137). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
66.
ShifrerD. (2013). Stigma of a label: Educational expectations for high school students labeled with learning disabilities. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 54, 462–480.
67.
SinclairS.HuntsingerJ. (2006). The interpersonal basis of self-stereotyping. In LevinS.van LaarC. (Eds.), Stigma and group inequality: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 235–259). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
68.
StrileyK. M. (2014). The stigma of excellence and the dialectic of (perceived) superiority and inferiority: Exploring intellectually gifted adolescents’ experiences of stigma. Communication Studies, 65, 139–153.
69.
TaylorC. (1985). Human agency and language: Philosophical papers2. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
70.
ThomasC. (1999). Female forms: Experiencing and understanding disability. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
71.
WaldmanH. B. D.CannellaD.PerlmanS. P. (2009). Invisible and unseen disabilities. The Exceptional Parent, 39(8/9), 60–63.
