Services and programs for academically talented students with learning disabilities

Other studies suggest the importance of this shift in educational paradigm, from remediation of weaknesses to the development of gifts and talents (Baum & Owen, 2004; Reis et al., 1995). Minner (1990) found that teachers invariably focus on LD, even to the point of declining to refer or otherwise involve LD students in gifted educational programs. Sadly, the orientation toward repairing problems versus nurturing strengths dominates educational services for academically talented students with LD even at the collegiate level (Ferri et al., 1997; Reis et al., 1995).

Current research suggests only a few approaches exist for differentiating education for academically talented students with LD while simultaneously considering their social and emotional growth (Brody & Mills, 1997, 2004). Few programs actually exist for this population in schools. Boodoo and colleagues (1989) found, for example, that the majority of responding school systems surveyed reported having no gifted children with LD in their district and no special programming available. It is highly unlikely that these students are not in these schools systems, although very likely that they are not being identified or provided with services.

Based on the review of outcome information from intervention studies and based on her own work, Nielsen (2002) recommended that districts provide twice-exceptional students with a continuum of service options. The suggestion of a continuum of services has existed in gifted programming for many years in the Schoolwide Enrichment Model (Renzulli & Reis, 1985, 1997). To support the proposition that gifted students with identified LD are entitled to all legal rights available to other students in special education, Neilsen cited legislation mandating a continuum of educational services in special education. This continuum ranges from the full-time general education classroom to special classes or day schools and residential facilities (Individuals with Disabilities Act Amendments, 1997). Nielsen (2002) argued that "the vastly differing types and levels of disability of twice-exceptional learners, especially when combined with their giftedness, require that a variety of services and interventions be available to them" (p. 101). Consistent with this line of reasoning, she explained that the needs of some twice-exceptional students with very mild LDs may be met within the general education classroom with support from special gifted educators. For students with milder LDs, a combination of special and gifted education programming available in a resource room setting may work best to meet their needs. In contrast, for gifted students whose degree of LD is on the moderate to more severe side of the continuum of disability, a more intensive level of services in self-contained specialized settings may be most appropriate.

Types of Intervention Programs

In her review of intervention literature on gifted students with LDs, Newman (2004) summarized interventions that capitalize on student strengths and remediate their weaknesses using three different service delivery models of school-based interventions: