Strategies for Supporting Students Who Are Twice-Exceptional

Full text

The Journal of Special Education Apprenticeship The Journal of Special Education Apprenticeship
Volume 7 Number 2 Article 8
6-2018
Strategies for Supporting Students Who Are Twice-Exceptional Strategies for Supporting Students Who Are Twice-Exceptional
Janet Josephson
Millersville University of Pennysylvania
Charlton Wolfgang
Millersville University of Pennysylvania
Rich Mehrenberg
Millersville University of Pennysylvania
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/josea
Part of the Special Education and Teaching Commons
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation
Josephson, Janet; Wolfgang, Charlton; and Mehrenberg, Rich (2018) "Strategies for Supporting Students
Who Are Twice-Exceptional,"
The Journal of Special Education Apprenticeship
: Vol. 7: No. 2, Article 8.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.58729/2167-3454.1073
Available at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/josea/vol7/iss2/8
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion
in The Journal of Special Education Apprenticeship by an authorized editor of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more
information, please contact scholarworks@csusb.edu.

THE JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPRENTICESHIP, 7(2)
Strategies for Supporting Students Who Are Twice-Exceptional
Janet Josephson
Charlton Wolfgang
Rich Mehrenberg
Millersville University of Pennsylvania
Students with disabilities have
complex learning needs. It wasn’t until the
2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with
Disabilities in Education Act (IDEA) that
federal attention was pointed towards
students who are both gifted and have a
disability. This concept, known as twice-
exceptionality, is a difficult concept to fully
comprehend as the characteristics of these
students can be complicated. Reis, Baum,
and Burke (2014) define twice-exceptional
(2e) students as those who have
simultaneous characteristics of a gifted
student and a student with a disability. In
order to earn the 2e label, students must be
identified as having high aptitude as well as
a disability as classified by their state of
residence. Although research on 2e
students has increased within the last three
decades, the needs of these students are
not necessarily being met in schools
(National Association for Gifted Children,
2013). There is still limited consensus on
the needs and characteristics of these
students as well as a lack of understanding
of the most effective strategies for teaching
them (Reis et al., 2014).
There are stark differences between
2e students and those students identified as
having solely a disability or gifts and talents.
Students with disabilities are often
recognized by their families and teachers
when they are not showing the same
academic, social, or developmental
characteristics as same-age peers. In the
educational setting, teachers often target
the areas of development that need
support when working with students with
disabilities. Students with gifts and talents
often stand out to their families and
teachers in other ways; they display
strengths, talents, or interests that
differentiate them from same-age peers.
Teachers of students with gifts and talents
may work to create advanced programming
that appropriately challenges them.
According to Baum and Owen (2004), what
complicates the identification and progress
of 2e students is the fact that their
characteristics often mask each other; their
disability can mask their gifts and talents, or
their gifts can mask their disability.
Furthermore, because of the variation of
characteristics among defined disabilities, it
is challenging to describe specific
Vol. 7(2) June 2018

THE JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPRENTICESHIP, 7(2)
characteristics of 2e students (Barnard-
Brak, Johnsen, Hannig, & Wei, 2015). In the
educational setting, teachers may
experience difficulties meeting the needs of
2e students while simultaneously
addressing their remarkable strengths
because these students don’t meet the
traditional definitions of their dual
exceptionalities (Reis et al., 2014).
According to the National Center for
Education Statistics, an estimated 3,189,000
American school-age students were
enrolled in programs for gifted students
during the 2011-2012 academic year
(Snyder, de Brey, & Dillow, 2016). It is
estimated that between 180,000 (Davis &
Rimm, 2003) and 360,000 (National
Education Association, 2006) of those
students are identified as 2e. Barnard-Brak
et al., (2015) estimate that 9.1% of students
with identified disabilities may be
academically advanced or gifted. Because
these students display significant strengths
and varied challenges simultaneously, it can
be difficult to see how they fit the
characteristics of being gifted or having a
disability. Existing research on these
students has indicated difficulties in
identification of 2e students due to a lack of
uniform evaluation practices (e.g.,
Wormald, Rogers, & Vialle, 2015), teachers’
expectations of students based on disability
label (e.g., Missett, Azano, Callahan, &
Landrum, 2016), and general lack of
knowledge of effective practices to engage
these students (e.g., Winebrenner, 2003).
Reis et al. (2014) reported in a number of
studies that teachers were reluctant to
provide appropriately challenging
opportunities for students because of their
dual diagnoses. Students who are twice-
exceptional are often served according to
their first diagnosis; be it a gifted diagnosis
or a diagnosis of a disability (Baum & Owen,
2004).
In this article, we will identify five
evidence-based strategies that teachers
should consider when supporting and
instructing 2e students in the elementary,
middle, and secondary grades. We
recognize that there are a multitude of
strategies available to teachers of 2e
students, but here we present those that
can be most immediately implemented in
teachers’ classrooms. After a brief
explanation of each strategy, examples of
specific classroom applications of these
ideas will be shared. See Table 1 for an
overview of the application of these
strategies.
Understand the difference between
students who are 2e and those who are
gifted underachievers without disabilities.
When 2e students are not achieving to
expectations, they may be misidentified as
gifted underachievers. They may present
some of the same behaviors and outcomes
as 2e students, such as an inability to stay
organized or unexplained differences
between test scores and classroom
performance. However, the underlying
causes are different and the interventions
and approaches, therefore, must be
different as well (Reis & Ruban, 2005). A
comprehensive evaluation is necessary to
determine whether a student is
underachieving or has a comorbid disability.
A multidimensional approach to identifying
twice-exceptionality should include
psychometric assessments, behavioral
checklists, portfolio reviews, and interviews
(Reis et al., 2014). A combination of formal
and informal measures is useful in
determining if a student is a 2e student or a
gifted student who is underachieving.

THE JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPRENTICESHIP, 7(2)
Table 1
Strategies to Support 2e Students in Educational Settings
Strategy
Application in educational settings
Emphasize the strengths of 2e students first
Provide opportunities for student choice;
allow the student multiple ways to respond
to new content
Address the needs of 2e students
Explicitly link new content to previous
learning; teach organizational skills
Support the social-emotional needs of 2e
students
Allow additional time for task completion to
alleviate anxiety; help 2e students develop
self-advocacy; teach stress management
techniques
Recognize the difference between 2e
students and gifted underachievers
After assessment data and other evidence is
gathered, consider if the student is 2e or a
gifted underachiever; provide the
appropriate support(s) including counseling
support, learning support, and/or gifted
support
Collaborate and communicate to provide
optimal support of 2e students
Invite gifted support personnel and disability
support personnel to plan meetings; create a
balance of activities that will offer both
challenge and remediation
Sources: (King, 2005; Willard-Holt, Weber, Morrison, & Horgan, 2013)
Contrasted with the characteristics
listed in Table 2, one characteristic more
commonly associated with under-
achievement is a dependent style of
learning in which the student prefers that
the teacher provide the information in a
structured lecture-like format. Other
characteristics include alienation,
withdrawal, distrust, pessimism, anxiety,
impulsivity, inattention, hyperactivity,
distractibility, aggression, hostility,
resentment, passive-aggression, social
immaturity, fear of failure, negative
attitudes toward school, antisocial
attitudes, fear of success, an external locus
of control, perfectionism, lack of goal-
directed behavior, poor coping skills, poor
self-regulation, and heightened defense
mechanisms (Peterson, 2006). Some of the
aforementioned characteristics are also
associated characteristics of students with
disabilities. Because these characteristics
can present themselves in both
underachieving gifted students and 2e
students, it is critical that professional
educators take a multidimensional
approach to determine if there is the
presence of a disability or not. Students
presenting these traits and characteristics

THE JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPRENTICESHIP, 7(2)
will benefit from working with school
counselors and other trained personnel.
Provide instruction that capitalizes
on the student’s strengths first. It may
seem counterintuitive to address the
strengths of 2e students before their needs.
Don’t be mistaken – it is important to
balance our attention to the strengths and
needs of 2e students so that their individual
education needs are appropriately met.
Considering the strengths and interests of
the student before addressing their areas
for remediation is a concept that has been
strongly supported in 2e research (e.g. King,
2005). Many researchers argue that talent
development is the most crucial component
of the education of 2e students (e.g. Reis et
al., 2014).
Identifying the specific strengths on
which to capitalize can be a difficult task in
itself. Baldwin, Omdal, and Pereles (2015)
have identified several questions that
educators can consider when trying to
identify the specific strengths of a student.
Such considerations include the areas in
which the student excels, the topics in
which the student demonstrates advanced
knowledge, and how the student uses their
strengths to mitigate their areas of need.
Families, assessments, checklists, and
interviews can also support educators in
determining the specific strengths of 2e
students. When 2e students’ strengths are
emphasized in their educational
experiences, they have a more positive
outlook on their difficulties (Wang &
Niehart, 2015). Wang and Niehart found
that by addressing the strengths of 2e
students, their academic self-concept
increased. This is an important finding as
many psychological studies have noted that
the negative psychological traits of 2e
students, such as frustration confronting
weaknesses and difficulty setting realistic
goals, can have problematic influences on
their academic achievement (e.g., Lovecky,
2004).
One way that educators can
capitalize on the strengths of 2e students in
their classrooms is to teach the way that
students learn (Winebrenner, 2003). If, for
example, a 2e student learns best when
permitted to restate the new content,
teachers can provide multiple opportunities
for student response. In actuality, students
learn best when content is represented in
multiple ways (UDL Center, 2014), and
teachers are encouraged to identify how
they can implement this practice on a
regular basis in their classrooms.
Another way that educators can
focus on the strengths of 2e students is to
set a fair level of challenge for the student.
When 2e students are provided
opportunities to problem-solve and use
their creativity, they are more open to
participate in challenging curriculum (Baum
& Owen, 2004). For example, some 2e
students with a disability in the area of
writing and gifts and talents in the area of
creativity may be able to create work
products that go beyond traditional paper-
and-pencil approaches; perhaps these
students may best show what they’ve
learned by creating original video content
or a photo essay.
Provide instruction that addresses
the needs of 2e students second. Educators
and families cannot forget to address the
needs of 2e students. Targeting the needs
of 2e students should be the secondary
focus of educators; when educators
prioritize the targeting of needs, 2e
students can develop feelings of frustration
(Baum & Owen, 2004). When educators
place less emphasis on the disabilities of 2e
students, those students demonstrate a
greater willingness to attempt difficult

THE JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPRENTICESHIP, 7(2)
tasks, while also becoming more creatively
productive (Baum & Olenchak, 2002). It is
not uncommon that the needs of 2e
students are masked by their obvious
strengths and gifts in other areas. Experts
recommend that problem-solving teams
such as student support teams,
multidisciplinary teams, and child study
teams identify if the needs of 2e students
are learning needs or social-emotional
needs in order to best address them.
Because of the inherent variety of disability
characteristics, it can be challenging to
summarize the needs of 2e students. Table
2 identifies some of the more common
needs of 2e students based on their
disability.
Table 2
Characteristics of Some 2e Students According to Disability
Twice-exceptionality
Description of the Learner
Specific learning disability
Forgetfulness, difficulty with memory tasks,
delayed reading skills, difficulty organizing
their written or spoken ideas, delayed
mathematical skills, discrepancy between
verbal and written communication
Emotional and behavioral disability
Easily frustrates, focuses on their limitations,
poor self-concept
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
Difficulty focusing, disorganization, difficulty
maintaining attention during less preferred
tasks
Autism spectrum disorders
Intense focus in preferred subjects, difficulty
making and maintaining friendships,
uncooperative behavior
Educators need to find balance
between identifying and addressing each
need of these students and simultaneously
avoiding unnecessary or inappropriate
labeling. A number of effective practices
have been recommended in the 2e
literature as evidence-based interventions
to support students’ needs. Winebrenner
(2003) suggests that teachers explicitly link
new content to previous learning. One
challenge for students with a comorbid
learning disability is the ability to relate new
and old content. When teachers provide
informed instruction to students (e.g.,
“Today we are learning about how to
calculate the area of a rectangle. This
relates to last week’s topic of determining
the number of square units in your
geoboard shapes; last week we counted
square units to find the area. This week we
will explore the algorithm for calculating
area”), they are assisting students in making
links to their prior knowledge. Teachers can
also help 2e students link new content to
previous content by having students
brainstorm what they know about a new

THE JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPRENTICESHIP, 7(2)
topic, complete an advance organizer about
the topic, or engage in a full class
completion of a Know-Wonder-Learn (KWL)
chart.
Another challenge for some 2e
students is their ability to stay organized
(Baldwin et al., 2015). Teachers can provide
a structure that promotes organization in
their classrooms. For example, the use of
color-coding materials can assist 2e
students in locating and storing their
subject-specific belongings in and out of the
classroom. Providing students with a
structure for class note-taking can support
their organization of new content (Boyle,
2010). Organizational skills are important
for making progress on long-term projects
and assignments, and these skills may need
to be explicitly taught to 2e students.
Although one recommendation for
instructing 2e students includes project-
based and inquiry-based approaches
(Baldwin et al., 2015), 2e students with
organizational difficulties will need
assistance structuring their time and
establishing short-term deadlines (Nielsen,
2002). Teachers can provide an overview of
the assignment and establish short-term
goals and checkpoints to optimize student
success (Winebrenner, 2003).
Support the social-emotional needs
of 2e students. Gifted students tend to
experience greater asynchronicity in their
social-emotional development than their
neurotypical age-peers. This gap is even
more pronounced in 2e students.
Traditional academic interventions that are
effective in supporting remedial students
can be counterproductive for 2e students.
These students are well aware of their
strengths and difficulties; it is not
uncommon for them to feel inadequate
(Baldwin et al., 2015). These students may
display elevated levels of anxiety, poor
academic self-concept, and executive
functioning deficits due to the significant
discrepancies between their strengths and
weaknesses (Reis et al., 2014). Educators
can support the social-emotional needs of
2e students by acknowledging their
exceptional abilities while simultaneously
providing appropriate accommodations,
therapeutic interventions, and specialized
instruction. These may include evidence-
based interventions to develop social skills
and executive functioning, counseling and
therapeutic supports, and accommodations
that include alternative ways to learn
material and demonstrate understanding
(Baldwin et al., 2015; Winebrenner, 2003).
Students with twice-exceptionalities
need a nurturing and safe classroom
environment that supports the
development of their potential (Reis, et al.,
2014). Researchers (e.g. Baldwin et al.,
2015; Reis & Ruban, 2005; Winebranner,
2003) have identified numerous features
and strategies teachers can incorporate into
their classrooms to cultivate a supportive
environment for 2e students. Teachers can
work to create a calm and predictable
environment in which individual differences
are acknowledged and valued.
Instructionally, teachers can encourage
students to develop their potential by
providing appropriately challenging
activities, by aligning assessment with
student strengths and weaknesses, and by
incorporating multiple modalities and
flexible learning groups. When teachers
define excellence in terms of individual
student progress and model the use of
compensation strategies, the social-
emotional needs of 2e students are
supported.
One specific activity to help develop
a nurturing classroom environment for 2e
students is through the identification of

THE JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPRENTICESHIP, 7(2)
banished or dead words (Ferguson, 2015).
Although some may think that words
synonymous with intelligent have a positive
connotation, Schroeder-Davis (1999) found
that gifted and talented adolescent
students who were labeled by their peer
groups (e.g. brainiac, nerd, bookworm)
experienced a loss of popularity,
exploitation, and incredibly high
expectations. Similar labels may be assigned
by peers in terms of one’s disability status
(e.g. dumb, stupid, idiot) which can cause
students to experience low popularity and
low expectations of their capabilities.
Words that are not acceptable to use in the
classroom, but are often used as synonyms
for gifted, are written on small pieces of
paper and posted on a bulletin board.
Teachers can use a jail cell theme to convey
that the banished words have been put
away or incorporate a tombstone to
illustrate a cemetery effect for dead words
(Ferguson, 2015). Students can reflect on
these terms and their impact on each other
to promote self-understanding.
Require ongoing communication
and collaboration between special
education teachers, gifted specialists, and
families. Currently, gifted students are not
considered under the same umbrella of
federal laws that mandate special education
rights and services. Instead, they are
supported to various degrees through a
patchwork of state and local laws (Zirkel,
2016). Therefore, it is not only essential
that 2e stakeholders are familiar with these
requirements, but that they also make
significant effort towards effective
collaborations through the lens of the
student’s individualized education program
(IEP).
Collaboration in planning and
instruction for 2e students should be
prioritized in schools (Coleman & Gallagher,
2015). The problem-solving team for 2e
students should not only include the
learning support teacher who provides
remediation, but also the designated
provider of gifted services. These two
professionals should work together to
provide a balanced program that addresses
the student’s disability while also providing
the appropriate level of challenge and
opportunity in the areas of giftedness
(Baldwin, Baum, Pereles & Hughes, 2015).
Although we strive to address strengths
before needs as recommended in the
research, aiming for a balanced approach
calls for many hands. Table 3 lists some
common considerations for various
stakeholders that may serve as the
foundation for deep and relevant
collaboration and planning.
Schools and families can collaborate
in a number of ways to meet the needs of
2e students. Families often have insights to
share on their child’s strengths, likes and
dislikes, creativity, motivation, and
attention. They can provide important clues
about their child’s passions that can be
capitalized upon in determining the most
appropriate programming options for their
child. We suggest that families and schools
collaborate as frequently as necessary. In
some cases, check-ins may occur weekly, bi-
weekly, or monthly as face-to-face
meetings, phone conferences, or virtual
web conference meetings. The use of a
communication journal that travels
between school and home can also increase
the ongoing collaboration between families
and the various educators providing
services.

THE JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPRENTICESHIP, 7(2)
Table 3
Stakeholders’ Considerations for Effective Collaboration of Twice-Exceptional Students
Stakeholder
Sample Considerations
Gifted teacher
Are the student’s strengths being maximized?
Is the student bored?
How can learning better incorporate higher level thinking skills?
Special education
teacher
Are the student’s needs sufficiently supported?
Are IEP goals appropriate and relevant?
Are accommodations appropriate and utilized?
General education
teacher
Is the general education classroom the appropriate learning
environment for the student?
Is differentiated instruction an appropriate strategy?
How does the student socialize with classmates?
Family/guardian
How can the family nurture the student’s social and emotional
development beyond the school day?
Are there any current family events that may impact learning?
Do you feel that the other stakeholders view you as a valued and
respected team member?
Final Thoughts
The concept of twice-exceptionality
can be a challenge for schools, families, and
the students themselves. However, we have
outlined several considerations to ensure
that the needs of 2e students are met in the
school environment. When teachers
acknowledge the strengths of the student
before addressing their areas of need, there
is a higher likelihood of success for the
student (King, 2005). If teachers provide
access to challenging content in multiple
ways, 2e students may be more engaged
(Baum & Owen, 2004). Additionally,
acknowledging that 2e students have
unique social-emotional needs and finding
ways to help them navigate social situations
in the school setting is critical for their long-
term success (Reis et al., 2014). Beyond
acknowledging their social-emotional
needs, there are a number of strategies that
teachers can teach to 2e students to help
mitigate feelings of anxiety, withdrawal, or
negative attitudes towards school (Baldwin
et al., 2015). Collaboration can help
classroom teachers decipher between 2e
students and gifted underachievers. The
needs of 2e students can be best supported
when special educators, gifted support
personnel, and families exercise
collaboration (Coleman & Gallagher, 2015).
Considering a collaborative approach to
meeting the unique needs and strengths of
each 2e student can maximize their
opportunities for success in the school
environment.
References
Baldwin, L., Baum, S., Pereles, D., & Hughes,
C. (2015). Twice-exceptional learners:
The journey toward a shared vision.
Gifted Child Today, 38(4), 206-214.

THE JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPRENTICESHIP, 7(2)
Baldwin, L., Omdal, S. N., & Pereles, D.
(2015). Beyond Stereotypes:
Understanding, recognizing, and
working with twice-exceptional
learners. Teaching Exceptional Children,
47(4), 216-225.
Barnard-Brak, L., Johnsen, S., Hannig, A., &
Wei, T. (2015). The incidence of
potentially gifted students within a
special education population. Roeper
Review. 37, 74-83.
Baum, S. & Olenchak, R. (2002). The
alphabet children: GT, ADHD, and more.
Exceptionality, 10, 77-91.
Baum, S., & Owen, S. (2004). To be gifted
and learning disabled: Strategies for
helping bright students with LD, ADHD,
and more. Mansfield, CT: Creative
Learning Press.
Boyle, J. (2010). Strategic note-taking for
middle-school students with learning
disabilities in science classes. Learning
Disability Quarterly, 33(2), 93-109.
Coleman, M. R., & Gallagher, S. (2015).
Meeting the needs of students with 2e:
It takes a team. Gifted Child Today,
38(4), 252-254.
Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (2003). Education
of the gifted and talented. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ferguson, S.K. (2015). Affective Education:
Addressing the Social and Emotional
Needs of Gifted Students in the
Classroom. In F.A. Karnes & S.M. Bean
(Eds.), Methods and Materials for
Teaching the Gifted (479-512). Waco,
TX: Prufrock Press.
King, E. W. (2005). Addressing the social and
emotional needs of twice- exceptional
students. TEACHING Exceptional
Children, 38(1), 16–20.
Lovecky, D. V. (2004). Different minds:
Gifted children with AD/HD, Asperger
syndrome, and other learning deficits.
London: Jessica Kingsley.
Missett, T., Azano, A., Callahan, C., &
Landrum, K. (2016). The influence of
teacher expectations about twice-
exceptional students on the use of high
quality gifted curriculum: A case study
approach. Exceptionality, 24(1), 18-31.
National Association for Gifted Children,
(2013). Ensuring gifted children with
disabilities receive appropriate services:
Call for comprehensive assessment.
Washington, DC: Author.
National Education Association. (2006). The
twice-exceptional dilemma.
Washington, DC: Author.
Nielsen, M. E. (2002). Gifted students with
learning disabilities: Recommendations
for identification and programming.
Exceptionality, 10(2), 93-111
Peterson, J.S. (2006). Addressing counseling
needs of gifted students. Professional
School Counseling, 10(1): 43-51.
Reis, S. M., Baum, S. M., & Burke, E. (2014).
An operational definition of twice-
exceptional learners: Implications and
applications. Gifted Child Quarterly,
58(3), 217-230.
Reis, S.M. & Ruban, L. (2005). Services and
programs for academically talented
students with learning disabilities.
Theory Into Practice 44(2), 148-159.
Schroeder-Davis, S.J. (1999). Brains, brawn,
or beauty: Adolescent attitudes towards
three superlatives. Journal of Secondary
Gifted Education, 10(3), 134-148.
Snyder, T.D., de Brey, C., & Dillow, S.A.
(2016). Digest of Education Statistics
2015 (NCES 2016-014). National Center
for Education Statistics, Institute of
Education Sciences, U.S. Department of
Education. Washington, DC. UDL Center.
(2014). What is UDL. Retrieved from

THE JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPRENTICESHIP, 7(2)
http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/whatis
udl
U.S. Department of Education, Office of
Special Education Programs. (2015).
Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA) database. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/programs/osepide
a/618-data/state-level-data-
files/index.html#bcc
Wang, C. W., & Neihart, M. (2015).
Academic self-concept and academic
self-efficacy: Self-beliefs enable
academic achievement of twice-
exceptional students. Roeper Review,
37(2), 63-73.
Willard-Holt, C., Weber, J., Morrison, K. L.,
& Horgan, J. (2013). Twice-exceptional
learners’ perspectives on effective
learning strategies. Gifted Child
Quarterly, 57(4), 247-262.
Winebrenner, S. (2003). Teaching strategies
for twice-exceptional students.
Intervention in School and Clinic, 38(3),
131-137.
Wormald, C., Rogers, K., & Vialle, W. (2015).
A case study of giftedness and specific
learning
disabilities: Bridging the two
exceptionalities. Roeper Review, 37,
124-138.
Zirkel, P. A. (2016). Legal update of gifted
education. Journal for the Education of
the Gifted, 39(4), 315-337.