This study investigated an eleven-year-old boy with multiple exceptionalities. The participant was verbally gifted, learning-disabled in math, and health-impaired. Because of his health impairment, he had received home-bound instruction throughout his elementary school years and had had little contact with formal schooling. Using qualitative research methods, the investigators explored the participant's learning characteristics and educational experiences. Implications of Alec's story for the identification and education of gifted children with disabilities are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaumS. (1984). Meeting the needs of learning disabled gifted students. Roeper Review, 7(1), 16–19.
2.
BaumS.OwenS.V. (1988). High ability/learning disabled students: How are they different?Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 321–326.
3.
BaumS.EmerickL. J.HermanG. N.DixonJ. (1989). Identification, programs, and enrichment strategies for learning disabled youth. Roeper Review, 12(1), 48–53.
4.
BerkR. A. (1983). Learning disabilities as a category of underachievement. In FoxL. H.BrodyL.TobinD. (Eds.), Learning-disabled/gifted children (pp. 51–76). Baltimore: University Park Press.
5.
CalkinsL. M. (1986). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
6.
EricksonF. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In WittrockM. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching, Vol. 3 (pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.
7.
FeldhusenJ. F.Van Tassel-BaskaJ.SeeleyK. (1989). Excellence in educating the gifted. Denver: Love.
8.
FosterW. (1986). The application of single subject research methods to the study of exceptional ability and extraordinary achievements. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 33–37.
9.
FoxL. H.BrodyL.TobinD. (Eds.). (1983). Learning-disabled gifted children: Identification and programming. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
10.
FrenchJ. N. (1982). The gifted learning disabled child: A challenge and some suggestions. Roeper Review, 4(3), 19–21.
11.
GallagherJ. J. (1991). Personal patterns of underachievement. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 14, 221–233.
12.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.
13.
GoetzJ. P.LeCompteM. D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. San Diego: Academic Press.
14.
JohnsonS. K.CornA. L. (1989). The past, present and future of education for gifted children with sensory and/or physical disabilities. Roeper Review, 12(1), 13–23.
15.
LincolnY.GubaE. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
16.
MerriamS. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
17.
MoonS. M. (1991). Case study research in gifted education. In BuchananN. K.FeldhusenJ. F. (Eds.), Conducting research and evaluation in gifted education: A handbook of methods and applications (pp. 157–178). New York: Teachers College Press.
18.
MurrayD. M. (1985). A writer teachers writing (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
19.
MurrayD. M. (1987). Write to learn (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
20.
NielsenM. E.Mortoff-AlbertS. (1989). The effects of special education services on the self-concept and school attitude of learning disabled/gifted students. Roeper Review, 12(1), 29–36.
21.
NielsenM. E.HigginsL. D.HammondA. E.WilliamsR. A. (1994). Gifted children with disabilities. Gifted Child Today, 16(5), 9–12.
RosnerS. L.SeymourJ. (1983). The gifted child with a learning disability: Clinical evidence. In FoxL. H.BrodyL.TobinD. (Eds.), Learning-disabled/gifted children: Identification and programming (pp. 77–100). Baltimore: University Park Press.
24.
ShoreB. M.CornellD. G.RobinsonA.WardV. S. (1991). Recommended practices in gifted education: A critical analysis. New York: Teachers College Press.
25.
SilvermanL. K. (1993a). Strategies enable students with gifts and handicaps to succeed. Images, 7(3), 1, 10–16.
26.
SilvermanL. K. (1993b, August). New tests make highly gifted children invisible. Paper presented at the Tenth World Congress on Gifted and Talented Education, Toronto, Canada.
27.
SilvermanL. K.KearneyK. (1992). The case for the Stanford Binet L-M as a supplemental test. Roeper Review, 15(1), 34–37.
28.
SutterD. P.WolfJ. S. (1987). Issues in the identification and programming of the gifted/learning disabled child. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 10, 227–238.
29.
TannenbaumA. J.BaldwinL. J. (1983). Giftedness and learning disability: A paradoxical combination. In FoxL. H.BrodyL.TobinD. (Eds.), Learning-disabled/gifted children: Identification and programming (pp. 11–36). Baltimore: University Park Press.
30.
Van Tassel-BaskaJ. (1991). Serving the disabled gifted through educational collaboration. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 14, 246–266.
31.
VespiL.YewchukC. (1992). A phenomenological study of the social/emotional characteristics of gifted learning disabled children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 55–72.
32.
WhitmoreJ. R.MakerC. J. (1985). Intellectual giftedness in disabled persons. Rockville, MD: Aspen.
33.
WhitmoreJ. R. (1989a). Editorial. Roeper Review, 12(1), 4–5.
34.
WhitmoreJ. R. (1989b). Voices of experience. Four leading advocates for gifted students with disabilities. Roeper Review, 12(1), 5–13.
35.
WilliamsK. (1988). The learning-disabled gifted: An unmet challenge. GCT, 11(5), 17–18.
36.
YinR. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Newberry Park: Sage.
