Sunday, September 18, 2016

students With LD in Higher Education:Use and Contribution of Assistive Technology

Students With LD in Higher Education:Use and Contribution of Assistive Technology and Website Courses and Their Correlation to Students’ Hope and Well-Being


J Learn Disabil July/August 2012 45308-318first published on January 20, 2011

  1. Tali Heiman, PhD
  2. Dorit Olenik Shemesh, PhD1
  1. 1Open University of Israel, Ra’anana, Israel
  1. Tali Heiman, Department of Education and Psychology, The Open University of Israel, 108 Ravutski Street, Ra’anana 43107, Israel Email: talihe@openu.ac.il

Abstract

This study examined the extent and patterns of usage of web courses, and their contribution to the academic and social perceptions of 964 undergraduate students with and without learning disabilities studying in higher education. Students were asked to complete four questionnaires examining the usage patterns of various adaptive technologies and their contribution to the student. The questionnaires assessedPerceptions of Learning through Online Usage; Accessibility of Campus Computing; Hope Scale and Subjective Well-being Scale. A detailed examination of the usage patterns of online courses revealed that, compared to the comparison group, students with LD log more often into the course sites, going into the forum more frequently and leaving significantly more messages on the forum than students in the comparison group. Findings indicated that students with LD are more familiar with assistive technology and use it more than the comparison group. Students with LD reported higher scores on the Hope scale, they felt an increased drive to find different pathways to attain their goals, as well as being motivated to pursue those goals, and their subjective well-being was higher that of the students in the comparison group.

6 Technology Challenges Facing Education

Despite increasingly widespread adoption of technologies in virtually every aspect of K-12 education, significant challenges are preventing widespread effective implementation. According to researchers, though some of those challenges are systemic and some related to the technologies themselves, teachers and education leaders share in the blame as well.
"The NMC Horizon Report: 2013 K-12 Edition," put together by the New Media Consortium as part of the Horizon Project, identifies key emerging issues in education technology using primary and secondary research and input from an advisory board comprising "internationally recognized practitioners and experts" in ed tech. Among those issues are challenges that represent significant constraints on the adoption of technology in education.
In past reports, those challenges have centered largely on reluctance on the part of administrators and teachers, lack of preparation, and lack of support or funding. This year's findings followed largely along those lines as well, though some new challenges were identified as well.
Challenge 1: professional development. Key among all challenges is the lack of adequate, ongoing professional development for teachers who are required to integrate new technologies into their classrooms yet who are unprepared or unable to understand new technologies.
"All too often, when schools mandate the use of a specific technology, teachers are left without the tools (and often skills) to effectively integrate the new capabilities into their teaching methods," according to the report. "The results are that the new investments are underutilized, not used at all, or used in a way that mimics an old process rather than innovating new processes that may be more engaging for students."
Challenge 2: resistance to change. Resistance to technology comes in many forms, but one of the key resistance challenges identified in the report is "comfort with the status quo." According to the researchers, teachers and school leaders often see technological experimentation as outside the scope of their job descriptions.
Challenge 3: MOOCs and other new models for schooling. New in this year's report, new models for teaching and learning are providing "unprecedented competition to traditional models of schooling." In particular, the MOOC (massive open online course) — probably the hottest topic in higher education right now — was identified as being "at the forefront" of discussions about new modes of delivering K-12 education.
"K-12 institutions are latecomers to distance education in most cases, but competition from specialized charter schools and for-profit providers has called attention to the needs of today's students, especially those at risk," according to the report.
Challenge 4: delivering informal learning. Related to challenge 3, rigid lecture-and-test models of learning are failing to challenge students to experiment and engage in informal learning. But, according to the report, opportunities for such informal learning can be found in non-traditional classroom models, such as flipped classrooms, which allow for a blending of formal and informal learning.
Challenge 5: failures of personalized learning. According to the report, there's a gap between the vision of delivering personalized, differentiated instruction and the technologies available to make this possible. So while K-12 teachers seem to see the need for personalized learning, they aren't being given the tools they need to accomplish it, or adequate tools simply don't exist.
Challenge 6: failure to use technology to deliver effective formative assessments. The report noted: "Assessment is an important driver for educational practice and change, and over the last years we have seen a welcome rise in the use of formative assessment in educational practice. However, there is still an assessment gap in how changes in curricula and new skill demands are implemented in education; schools do not always make necessary adjustments in assessment practices as a consequence of these changes. Simple applications of digital media tools, like webcams that allow non-disruptive peer observation, offer considerable promise in giving teachers timely feedback they can use."
Emerging Trends and Opportunities
In the context of those challenges, the annual NMC Horizon Report identified emerging technologies that will have a significant impact on education in the near term, mid-term, and long term. It also identified key emerging trends, which we reported in our earlier preview of the 2013 report.
To recap, the report's authors identified five key trends impacting education over the next five years. Those included:
  1. An increasing shift toward blended learning, online-learning, and technology-driven collaborative learning;
  2. The growth in the potential of social networks to allow teachers to engage students online;
  3. Openness of educational resources and technology is "becoming a value";
  4. BYOD is becoming more common as the cost of technology drops for students; and
  5. The role of the educator is being challenged as resources become more accessible on the Internet.
Emerging Technologies
The report also identified the technologies that will have a palpable effect on education over the next five ears, broken down by near term (one year from now or sooner), the mid-term (two to three years out), and the long term (four to five years out).
In the near term, cloud computing was identified as the top trend. The report cited several examples of its use in teaching and learning, including cloud-based 1-to-1 programs using Chromebooks and computing platforms that allow for shared desktops. It also identified the use of the cloud in K-12 IT infrastructure.
Also in the near term is mobile learning. According to the report: "Because of their portability, flexibility, and natural, intuitive interfaces, mobiles are especially enticing to schools, and a growing number of them have turned to tablets as a cost-effective strategy for one-to-one learning — a systemic solution in which every student is provided a device that can be used to support learning in and outside of the classroom. In many regions of the world, students come to class already familiar and comfortable with the technology. At the end of 2012, the Daily Mail reported that 75% of ten-year-olds in the UK, for example, own a mobile device, and the global average is approaching 50%."
I the mid-term, NMC identified learning analytics — the use of data and analytics to customize education for individual students — and open content (also known as open educational resources) as significant technologies that will impact education. The report characterized OER as essentially the opposite of cumbersome, expensive, and quickly outdated textbooks.
"Educators are taking advantage of open resources to expand their curricula with media-rich tools and texts that can be used and adapted to specific lessons," according to the report. "Formerly bound by the framework of standardized course materials, teachers now have access to a wealth of digital information that they can use to meet district expectations."
In the longer term, four to five years, the two technologies identified in the report were 3D printing and virtual and remote laboratories. Both are currently in use in several districts in the United States and are not technically new; but, according to the report, they are about to become more mainstream, in particular in the context of improving STEM education (science, technology, engineering, and math). In the case of 3D printers, physical models of fossils or proteins or molecules or other objects can be whipped up on the fly, allowing students to interact with them. In the case of virtual and remote labs, schools that lack resources to buy costly equipment will be able to fill in the gaps with less costly alternatives, allowing students to engage in experimentation, even if that experimentation isn't direct.
The complete report, "NMC Horizon Report: 2013 K-12 Edition," will be available to the public Wednesday on NMC's site. A preview and additional information about the report is available now. For more, visit nmc.org/publications/2013-horizon-report-k12.

Journals for Computer-Mediated Learning: Publications of Value for the Online Educator.

Authors:
Elbeck, Matt
Mandernach, B. Jean
Source:
International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning; 2009, Vol. 10 Issue 3, p1-19, 19p
Physical Description:
Bibliography; Table
Document Type:
Article
Subjects:
Education -- Periodicals -- Reviews; Web-based instruction -- Bibliographies;Bibliography (Documentation); Computers in education
ISSN:
14923831
E-Journal Article:
E-Journal Full Text 
Accession Number:
508036472


MORE CHARTS HERE: http://web.b.ebscohost.com.cmich.idm.oclc.org/ehost/detail/detail?sid=9a0217bc-4be6-474a-b8c0-40327c24467f%40sessionmgr103&vid=0&hid=125&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=508036472&db=eft

A reflective conversation with Terry Friedrichs on teaching academics to gifted students with Asperger Syndrome

A reflective conversation with Terry Friedrichs on teaching academics to gifted students with Asperger Syndrome Terence Paul Friedrichs University of St. Thomas, MN, USA Michael F Shaughnessy Eastern New Mexico University, USA Abstract In this reflective interview with Terry Friedrichs—a hands-on academic-learning specialist and researcher with gifted students with Asperger Syndrome—he defines these pupils, describes their ‘‘straightforward’’ and confusing traits, and recounts his initial and later instructional experiences with them over several decades. The piece proceeds to explain, for educators and parents, specific scholastic assets and challenges that high-potential young people with Asperger Syndrome may present within their hallmark definitional categories of social development, restrictive interests, and communication skills. The article also describes other frequently seen challenges for, and strengths of, these students in sensory and cognitive functioning. The interview closes with overall considerations for the contemporary schooling of these twice-exceptional pupils, and with the author’s views on future educational possibilities for them. Keywords Asperger Syndrome, Autism Spectrum Disorder, twice-exceptional Corresponding author: Michael F Shaughnessy, Eastern New Mexico University, School of Education, Portales, NM 88130, USA. Email: Michael.Shaughnessy@enmu.edu; tpfriedrichs@stthomas.edu Gifted Education International 2015, Vol. 31(1) 41–53 ยช The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0261429413486861 gei.sagepub.com Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at CMU Libraries - library.cmich.edu on September 18, 2016 Who are gifted students with Asperger Syndrome? Perhaps the easiest answer, at least for teachers, is that high-potential young people with Asperger Syndrome fit their local districts’ definitions of both giftedness and Asperger’s. Thus, these students will excel in one or more areas of giftedness, including intelligence, academic achievement, creativity, and visual and performing arts. They will also demonstrate characteristics of Asperger Syndrome. These traits, at least in many school districts, tend to follow DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition; American Psychological Association, 2000) guidelines, which state that students with Asperger’s demonstrate social challenges and restrictive interests. According to DSM-IV, these students will have at least two of the following social difficulties: (a) multiple non-verbal impairments (in eye, facial, body, or gestural behaviors), (b) problems in peer relationships, (c) challenges in sharing experiences, and (d) other difficulties in social and emotional reciprocity. The criteria also state that a student with Asperger Syndrome will possess at least one of these restrictive interest characteristics: (a) preoccupation with an unusual or abnormally intense interest, (b) adherence to specific, non-functional rituals, (c) stereotypied and repetitive motor mannerisms, and (d) preoccupation with parts of objects. Although gifted young people with Asperger’s need not display cognitive, communication, and sensory challenges, as is the case with many other students with other Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD), they may indeed show at least some of these challenges, as noted by many ASD authorities (Gilliam, 2001). Some cognitive traits frequently associated with Asperger’s include displaying superior knowledge in specific subjects, talking about a single subject excessively, and using pedantic speech. Some communication barriers include difficulties with slang expressions, with expressing uncertainties, and with understanding others’ criticisms. Sensory problems include uncoordinated, stereotyped, or unique gross motor movements. What are some characteristics of giftedness that are often confused with Asperger Syndrome? What are some frequently seen characteristics of gifted students who do have Asperger’s? Many observers have seen openings in some districts’ Asperger Syndrome definitions— whether these definitions focus narrowly on the DSM-IV’s social and restrictive traits or deal more expansively with Asperger’s-associated cognitive, communication, and sensory traits—for some gifted children to be misperceived as having Asperger’s. The following are some regularly misperceived social, communication, restrictive interest, sensory, and cognitive traits shown by gifted children without Asperger’s: social isolation, advanced vocabulary, specific and intense interests, and complex cognitive patterns (Gallagher and Gallagher, 2002). However, there are pupils who legitimately might be labeled as both gifted and having Asperger’s. Some of the traits of these dually identified students include adapting to new social situations and having accurate perceptions about their own interpersonal competencies (social traits); possessing advanced speech that actually works against them in 42 Gifted Education International 31(1) Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at CMU Libraries - library.cmich.edu on September 18, 2016 peer dialogues and classroom discussions (communication characteristics); one-sided lectures on important topics and difficulty in stopping those lectures (restrictiveinterest traits); poor fine-motor functioning, handwriting, and keyboard skills (sensory–motor qualities); and academic challenges in organization and in interpreting intellectual tones (cognitive traits) (Niehart and Poon, 2009). How did you become interested in educating young people who fit both the gifted and the Asperger’s definitions? I am proud to say that I am a professional ‘‘lifer’’ in the fields of gifted education and special education. That long-term experience in both areas eventually led me to teaching gifted young people with Asperger’s Syndrome. I had dreamed of being a general education teacher from the age of 4. However, in my internships and student teachings in the mid-1970s, I found that I particularly enjoyed instructing small student groups who were functioning either significantly above or clearly below the classroom’s general performance level. Based on those early experiences, I decided that I really wanted to work with special needs and gifted students, rather than with the large groups of secondary social studies pupils whom I had been trained to teach. In my early years as an ‘‘on-the-line’’ educator with both special needs and gifted pupils, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, I discovered that I was able to attain some good results in teaching gifted young people with learning and behavioral challenges. In remedial settings, I was able to help both gifted learning-disabled and gifted emotionally/ behaviorally disordered (EBD) students grow fairly quickly in basic skills. And in gifted education classes, I could instruct study skills—such as efficient reading, outlining, memorizing, and essay writing—so that many of these twice-exceptional students could acquire those competencies efficiently. For gifted young people with Asperger’s, whom I first encountered as a special needs teacher in learning-disabled/EBD resource rooms in the 1990s, I was able to teach basic skills so that these students could abstract the competencies quickly and use them independently. With the same students in a gifted setting, I found that I could get them to employ their impressive ‘‘special’’ knowledge in their application projects—projects into which they previously had not been able to integrate their knowledge. How has the education of gifted young people with ASD changed over the years, since you first encountered those students in the early learning-disabled/EBD resource rooms? There have been many changes in gifted and special education over my career (which has been mostly in teaching, with some additional years in graduate study and teacher training). Certainly, many of these changes have been for the better. Few of these improvements, though, have been as helpful as those associated with the education of young people with Asperger’s and other Autism Spectrum Disorders. In 1979, when I was first licenced in Minnesota to teach the student category ‘‘Special Learning and Behavior Problems’’ (SLBP), SLBP students with autism were Friedrichs and Shaughnessy 43 Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at CMU Libraries - library.cmich.edu on September 18, 2016 usually lumped together in classes with EBD pupils (Neihart, 2000). Following the lead of such early researchers as Bruno Bettleheim (1967), students with ASD were often considered to face challenges in forming social and emotional attachments. It was believed, in many quarters, that rewards or negative reinforcement, based on student responses to stimuli, could direct these young people toward appropriate social and emotional attachments and related interpersonal behaviors. Today, many authorities in the ASD field, such as Brenda Smith Myles (Myles and Simpson, 2002), instead believe that ASD is rooted in a neurological condition, for which educators must thoughtfully organize the child’s environment and that environment’s challenging learning, behavioral, and sensory tasks. Moving from their general to their specific challenges, gifted young people with Asperger Syndrome may be rigid, or at least they may be viewed in that way. Over your years of experience, have you encountered high-potential students with Asperger’s who wish to have things ‘‘their way or no way’’? I definitely have encountered gifted young people with Asperger’s who have been set in their demands, both academically and socially. Although I could focus my comments on these students’ rigidity over many years and settings (and could do so quite rigidly, in fact!), I find it more liberating to analyze for parents and educators the possible causes and results of these young people’s social and scholastic demands. To me, the causes of these young people’s rigidity are multifaceted. The socially related roots of this rigidity may involve the gifted child’s desires to arrange the environment, as well as that student’s tendency to be bold in stating desires to adults. Those roots may also be associated with the inclination of young people with ASD to put things in a consistent and comforting order. Gifted young people with Asperger’s may become even more demanding when they are under academic pressure, as noted by ASD clinician Michelle Garcia Winner (2001) and gifted educator Cynthia Lindquist (2006). For example, these students may become quite rigid in their requests for the same exact testing formats as they had during their last examinations. Some pupils may become particularly stressed and anxious when they separate from certain people or things. How do you work with parents to alleviate this anxiety? Many a gifted student with Asperger has had difficulty in separating from people, settings, and objects. At home, he or she may wish to cling to parents, the home itself, or favorite objects. Even as bright a student as Luke Jackson, author of the insightful, humorous, first-person account Freaks, Geeks, and Asperger’s Syndrome (2002), had a special pen that he was very much attached to. Parents can help educators to understand such separation problems if they can describe their child’s particular attachment to a parent, setting, or object, and if they can explain that attachment’s purpose or function (Quill, 2000). For instance, a parent can truly assist an educator if he or she can articulate that: (1) the child has a particular attachment to that parent when the bus arrives, (2) the student may react very negatively when the parent leaves, and (3) the pupil reacts especially negatively because harassing students ‘‘replace’’ the 44 Gifted Education International 31(1) Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at CMU Libraries - library.cmich.edu on September 18, 2016 parent on the school scene. When the parents describe the function of their child’s anxiety (i.e., the child is demonstrating concern over the ‘‘replacement’’ of a parent with a harasser), parents and teachers can together devise an on-target remedial approach (such as the parent driving the child to school, to productively elongate the child’s parental connection during a stressful time). Occasionally, teachers may need to report to parents a different kind of school separation anxiety. Educators may need to report (believe it or not!) that some students may not wish to leave an educational setting or a school object. In this case, the educator can explain to the parents the nature and function of the attachment, with the understanding that subsequent discussions between the parents and the child may help to alleviate the student’s problem. Despite their social challenges, gifted students with Asperger’s may excel in particular interests. Those interests, however, may prove to be ‘‘restrictive.’’ How would these apparent strengths turn into weaknesses? There are two ways in which interests can be restrictive. One way is that these interests can be in very narrow areas—realms that may fall into what some educators consider ‘‘useful’’ or ‘‘non-useful’’ areas. ‘‘Useful’’ areas might include Civil War history or scientific phyla, whereas ‘‘less useful’’ realms may include Civil War battle dates or weather predictions for the next few weeks. Unfortunately, because of the narrowness of both the ‘‘useful’’ and the ‘‘less useful’’ categories, many teachers and peers may care little about or may even be annoyed by hearing the gifted student with Asperger’s report detailed information. What is the second problem associated with restrictive interests in gifted young people with Asperger Syndrome? Gifted students with Asperger’s who demonstrate restrictive interests may go beyond the often-useful emphasis on acquiring information. They may also exude the far-lesshelpful focus on repeating that narrow information. Thus, these pupils may repeat their Civil War facts again and again, or may repeat them frequently in inappropriate settings. These young people might also focus almost obsessively on particular objects, just as less cognitively–able students with ASD might do. These gifted young people might move pencils, desks, even their own body parts in the same fashion, time and time again, as their non-gifted ASD peers do. Some of the social and restrictive-interest challenges endured by gifted students with Asperger’s relate to communication problems, which may be shown by these students, their non-disabled peers, or both. Have you seen negative peer reactions in the schools against students with Asperger’s, in the forms of criticism, teasing, or bullying? I definitely have seen negative comments toward our students. Again, though, rather than recite numerous examples of poor peer behavior that I have witnessed, I would prefer to address several actions that teachers can take to prepare our students to deal with that Friedrichs and Shaughnessy 45 Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at CMU Libraries - library.cmich.edu on September 18, 2016 behavior (Friedrichs, 2012). First, if gifted young people with Asperger’s can avoid criticism by lifting their performances in some specific skill areas, such as in a particular lunchroom behavior or phonics skill, then educators can truly make a difference with these students by practicing with them those critical competencies. Second, if these pupils can explain to their peers the reasons for their behavior in a broad category (such as non-participation in gym games), then these peers might be able to understand better why these twice-exceptional students do what they do. Third, these students’ educators can discuss with these pupils, to these youth’s benefit, the reasons for their peers’ behavior towards them. Educators can subsequently roleplay with these twice-exceptional students how to speak to their non-disabled peers about those reasons. Finally, if peer criticism cuts to the core of these young people’s very beings, through attacks on the children’s identities as persons with Asperger’s, or if peer attacks are malicious in any respect, then teachers may need to intervene to educate the critics and to protect the twice-exceptional students. Sometimes, students with Asperger’s may face challenges in communicating with peers and teachers because they have some thinking and language limitations. Have you noticed some situations in which gifted young people with Asperger’s may be limited by concrete thinking and language, and other times during which they may excel at abstract language and thought? If gifted students with learning disabilities are known for their inconsistencies in academic performance, and high-potential young people with emotional problems are seen as variable in their emotional performance, gifted young people with Asperger’s are often noted for their communication ups and downs. This variability may occur in both quality and flexibility of thought and language. Simply put, these high-potential young people with Asperger’s may be both knowledgeable and facile in some areas of language but not in others. Similarly, they may be cognitively and linguistically flexible in some subjects but not in others. Students with concrete language in a subject may be both less knowledgeable about and less flexible with language on that topic. In some subjects, concrete language users may have real trouble in understanding reasons and principles. In History class, for example, some gifted young people with Asperger’s may not grasp all of the important reasons behind a war, depression, or social injustice. In other subjects, though, these same students may grasp key principles quickly. In Math, for instance, some of these students may use multiplication concepts to quickly solve word problems. Is this the full picture? Although sensory challenges are not in states’ Asperger Syndrome definitions as frequently as social and communication difficulties are, sensory problems definitely can diminish the environmental functioning of gifted young people with Asperger’s. What about the environment and its sensory challenges? Do students truly need a distraction-free environment to thrive? Many gifted young people with Asperger’s can certainly benefit from a reduction in distractions in the learning environment. However, they may also be assisted by an increase 46 Gifted Education International 31(1) Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at CMU Libraries - library.cmich.edu on September 18, 2016 in breaks—which might be thought of as ‘‘planned distractions’’ from their usual learning environments and patterns. Many gifted students with Asperger’s may be distractible because of their sensitivity to stimuli, a sensitivity shown by both high-potential and ASD students. To keep highpotential students with Asperger’s engaged at higher instructional levels, teachers may be tempted to reduce all classroom stimuli. In reality, however, educators would be wise to present these young people with high-level cognitive stimuli. These presentations can ‘‘turn on’’ these pupils to new subjects or keep them focused on familiar topics in which they already excel. Even though gifted students with Asperger’s need a focused atmosphere, they also can benefit from breaks from that environment, after a learning segment has been completed. What about fluorescent lights? Are they useful or detrimental to the learning environment for gifted young people with Asperger’s? We have heard comments from both proponents and opponents of this lighting. Great sensitivity to visual stimuli (as with other sensory stimuli) is characteristic of many young people with Asperger Syndrome. Thus, it is not surprising that many gifted students with Asperger’s can be especially sensitive to the things that they see. Truly, it can be hard for some of these students to ‘‘see the light’’ in their academic work when they cannot even see that work at all! However, not all of these twice-exceptional young people are the same. Some have a tremendous sensitivity to fluorescent lights, whereas others do not. The wisest guideline is to assess these students, preferably early in the school year, for the particular stimuli to which they are sensitive. Through this assessment, educators may be enlightened earlier on these pupils’ various types of environmental sensitivity. Some intensity in gifted young people with Asperger’s seems brought forth by sensory challenges, while other intensity seems rooted in the students’ cognitive strengths. What should teachers do if they are faced with a gifted young person with Asperger’s who simply knows more about, and is more focused on, a topic than they are? Teachers can undertake many of the same actions for a highly-focused gifted student with Asperger’s as they would pursue for another high-potential young person whose knowledge exceeds their own. These actions often involve educators checking their own egos while they check for student strengths! That is, these teachers: (1) might listen to the student expand on his or her detailed knowledge on the topic at hand, (2) might ask the pupil questions to find out more about his or her knowledge on that topic, (3) might change assignment content so that tasks emphasize the student’s special knowledge, and (4) might direct the pupil toward community mentors who do know more than the student does. Educators should realize, however, that implementing these steps may play out somewhat differently with a gifted young person with Asperger’s than with other highpotential students. First, when a gifted student with ASD expands on favorite topics, teachers may have to listen beyond what they consider to be the point of social appropriateness. That is, educators may find themselves listening more intently to a Friedrichs and Shaughnessy 47 Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at CMU Libraries - library.cmich.edu on September 18, 2016 narrowly-focused but enthused pupil as they try to eat their lunches or as they attempt to exit for their homes at night. Second, when teachers of a gifted student with Asperger’s ask questions of this student, the educators may be surprised by the child’s possible processing-related need to hear rephrasings of questions. (These teachers may also be nonplussed when the student indelicately asks how they, as educators, could possibly not know about some piece of sought-after information!) Third, as noted by Margarita Bianco and her colleagues (2009), even when educators change task content for a student with ASD, the pupil may still have trouble with directions on how to organize answers. This student may need additional task changes on those directions or on different modes for presenting their answers. Fourth, when teachers direct a student toward community mentors, those experts must handle more than just pupil questions. The pupil will need additional direction from mentors to ensure that mentor–student interactions will be successful for both parties. How should teachers specifically react when a gifted student with Asperger’s asks a question that the educators cannot handle? Historically, high-potential young people have been known to raise awareness—and occasionally raise hackles—with their difficult queries. Gifted young people with Asperger may ask several specific kinds of queries related to their characteristic challenges. Some of these questions may prove especially difficult for educators. In their areas of cognitive excellence, for example, these students may ask questions that are indeed above their educators’ levels of knowledge. For these students, teachers need to acknowledge openly that they do not know the answers and that they may need time to research detailed responses. With their communication problems, students also may ask their own questions, with their own concrete, sometimes unique understandings of words and phrases. For these young people, educators might try to rephrase the pupils’ queries by trying out these students’ several possible meanings, one meaning at a time. Because of their social problems, these students also may ask questions that peers find blatantly ignorant of social norms. For these questions, young people with Asperger’s need to learn what the social norms are and why those guidelines exist. Finally, because of their propensities to repeat, these students may advance their same questions several times, feeling that educators have not adequately answered them. For those young people, educators first need to try to rephrase the pupils’ apparently intended queries, and then (failing clarifications that suit the students) need to schedule later times to clarify the questions and give ‘‘on-target’’ answers. Schooling is not just about asking questions but also about demonstrating needed knowledge, through completion of in-school tasks and homework. Do you see homework as important for gifted students with Asperger’s to undertake, to demonstrate their knowledge? Although homework can be overdone for some of our tightly wound Asperger Syndrome students, homework can help some gifted students with Asperger’s to demonstrate their knowledge. Homework can help these young people in at least two 48 Gifted Education International 31(1) Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at CMU Libraries - library.cmich.edu on September 18, 2016 critical ways. First, it can help students with Asperger’s to review basic skills that they have learned but not retained. These competencies are often ones very much holding these young people back academically. For example, for a third-grade math student, homework can help that student to remember math facts well, so that he or she can execute calculations fluently in word problems. For an older student, perhaps one in eleventh-grade American History, homework can help the student to remember the facts on which he or she will be tested, such as the causes of historical events. Second, and more fundamentally, for a gifted young person with Asperger’s, homework can enhance his or her overall capacity to work, an asset that prepares that student for a possible academic future. With homework’s importance duly acknowledged, there are work limits that may be as vital as the homework itself. For many students who reach social and sensory overload during the school day (sometimes to the point of ‘‘blowing a circuit’’), homework needs to be limited to just the most important review points. Homework may also need to be limited to a circumscribed time period. Finally, the pupil’s homework schedules also may need to fit his or her family’s busy social and therapeutic activities, at home and in the community. Like other young people, gifted students with Asperger’s face testing as well as homework challenges. Do gifted students with Asperger’s have testing preferences? As with other students, some high-potential young people with Asperger’s would prefer to have no tests at all! However, there are many more who may wish to ‘‘belly up to the bar’’ (as my father would say), to is show what they know. In my experience, these pupils may have several testing preferences for content, preparation, and methods. These young people, perhaps more than some other gifted students, prefer to know more precisely what content will be examined. They especially seem to appreciate visually related specifications for upcoming tests, such as study guides or marked notes. Gifted students with Asperger’s also appreciate preparation on how to study this marked, test-related material. Despite their natural intelligence, many such young people have not learned how to study, and they can definitely benefit from memory strategies (such as chunking and chaining) to acquire the factual data frequently seen on multiple-choice, true–false, and fill-in question examinations. Finally, many high-potential students with Asperger’s like to have test directions explained to them before an examination. They also may appreciate having the teacher monitor their first several answers, before the educator departs for broader classmonitoring duties. Considering all aspects of gifted students with Asperger’s—social, communication, restrictive-interest, sensory, and cognitive—are there differences in how these pupils might experience elementary and secondary schools? There are some variations in how these students may react to the two major levels. As in days gone by, many grade K-6 gifted young people with Asperger’s may continue to go Friedrichs and Shaughnessy 49 Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at CMU Libraries - library.cmich.edu on September 18, 2016 undiagnosed, as their communication, social, intellectual, and other deficits may seem to educators like developmental lags rather than disabilities. If students do not interpret non-verbal cues well (a communication deficit), for example, they may be simply considered ‘‘young and scattered.’’ If they do not do what the rest of the group is doing (a social challenge), then they may be considered just ‘‘self-centered.’’ And if they interpret language mostly concretely (a cognitive obstacle), then their linguistic interpretations may be thought of simply as ‘‘preferences’’ rather than problems. With the passage of time, though, these young people’s same problems may seem, to a wider array of educators, as being ‘‘real’’ difficulties. For instance, gifted students with Asperger’s in grades 7 to 12 may be more obvious in their non-verbal communication problems when teachers make waving motions toward the door and when these pupils do not move toward that exit as they should. These older students also appear to stick out more in social situations when they blurt or shout out answers. Similarly, they may make themselves apparent when they see only the most concrete meaning of some expressions, such as, ‘‘The fog was so thick, you could cut it with a knife!’’ As Harpur et al. (2004) note so well, gifted college students with Asperger’s may continue to demonstrate the pronounced communication, social, intellectual, and other needs seen at the grade 7–12 level—even if these young people improve in their skills in secondary school—as a result of the entire, complex life transitions that they encounter between high school and college. Considering the many and varied realms that must be addressed for highpotential students with Asperger’s to succeed, what kinds of teachers work well with them? I am a big believer in specific training in the fields in which one teaches. First, I think that gifted students with Asperger’s are best served by educators with ample and specific backgrounds in both gifted and ASD education. There are, finally, a few teacher training programs around the country that are beginning to focus on twice-exceptional young people, such as the program for which I am fortunate enough to serve as an adjunct professor, at the University of St. Thomas, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Some of these programs even have courses with specific segments that focus on gifted young people with ASD. Beyond strong college and in-service training, I also enjoy seeing teachers who have effective instructional behaviors in the classroom. For me, these behaviors incorporate the teacher traits of planning, flexibility, and family connectedness—characteristics useful for both educators of the gifted and teachers of young people with Asperger’s. Successful educators must not only create lessons, but also plan out the child’s physical environment in advance. They must be able to think about how the student might react differently in different situations. Owing to the complexity of these young people, teachers must also be flexible. Gifted students with Asperger’s may often show unexpected strengths or gaps, and they may display these surprising gaps in weak as well as strong areas. Educators certainly need to be able to react productively to these surprising patterns, providing rapid curricular advancement or additional step-by-step instruction 50 Gifted Education International 31(1) Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at CMU Libraries - library.cmich.edu on September 18, 2016 when needed. Finally, teachers need to keep in close touch with families throughout the school year. Families can help with initial instructional planning, can report on how well teaching is being received, and can brainstorm ways in which student strengths and weaknesses might be nurtured in the community. Can personality differences between gifted students with Asperger’s and their teachers enhance the relationships between these two groups? Specifically, can personality factors enhance the instructional productivity of educator–pupil pairs? Although educators may think that personality factors primarily enhance their social relationships with high-potential young people with Asperger’s, these factors can also enhance instructional relationships with these students. In dealing with students’ academic weaknesses, teachers need to be outgoing and need to reach out to young people early, when trouble first occurs. Conversely, in addressing pupils’ scholastic strengths, educators may need to lay back, listening carefully to what students wish to share about their special areas of knowledge. In dealing with the communication deficits of some young people with Asperger’s, teachers need to be prepared to provide those students with explanations for how and why they should communicate in a particular way, in a given situation. By contrast, in dealing with high-potential gifted communicators who have Asperger’s, educators can encourage (though not force) the students to present their impressive information in different ways than they would usually do. Often, I have found, the most skilled educators encourage students through their own, as well as the students’, sense of humor. As Lyons and Fitzgerald (2004) have recently found, some students with Asperger’s can truly excel in their sense of humor! What does the future hold for gifted young people with Asperger’s? There are many challenges today for gifted young people with Asperger’s, from both school and employment perspectives. In school, these young people currently may find themselves over-recognized for their weaknesses and undernoticed for their strengths. However, there is also expanding public and educator knowledge about, and growing employment and educational opportunities for, these students. As public knowledge of Asperger’s expands, these young people may be better understood and be better supported for their special challenges. Similarly, as teachers’ knowledge about Asperger’s grows, these young people may be more fully assisted in school, with more time spent on the pupils’ strengths and weaknesses, rather than on these students’ ‘‘perplexing’’ natures. Employment opportunities for gifted pupils with Asperger’s may also expand, as companies increasingly emphasize the technical knowledge that some of these young people possess. And employment opportunities may also grow, as employers learn to accommodate these individuals’ sometimes unique ways of doing things. In what direction do you intend to go in your own future efforts to teach gifted ASD young people? Friedrichs and Shaughnessy 51 Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at CMU Libraries - library.cmich.edu on September 18, 2016 In my ASD certification program at the University of St. Thomas, I was absolutely fascinated by what I learned! I acquired many skills from the ASD field with which I could assist the ‘‘whole child’’ (as aging ASD and gifted educators, like me, tend to call that student). In particular, I acquired many new insights into the ASD student’s social and emotional dimensions, understandings that I had not previously acquired as an academically focused learning-disabled/EBD and gifted education resource teacher. Based on my previous background with twice-exceptional young people and my new training in students with ASD, I believe that I might somehow be able to assist both the gifted and ASD fields—both of which need to know much more about our gifted ‘‘Aspies’’ (Bianco et al., 2009; Trail, 2010). Specifically, I believe that I could provide helpful academic recommendations on high-potential pupils with Asperger’s. I have even been considering undertaking an ASD-focused master’s degree, through which I might write a book on gifted young people with Asperger’s, one that emphasizes their often-overlooked academic functioning. Wish me luck! Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. References American Psychological Association (2000) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Bianco M, Smiley LR and Carothers DI (2009) Gifted students with Asperger’s Syndrome: Strategies for strength-based programming. Intervention in School and Clinic 44(4): 206–215. Bettleheim B (1967) The Empty Fortress: Infantile Autism and the Birth of the Self. New York: Free Press. Friedrichs TP (2012) Teaching academics to gifted children with Asperger’s Syndrome. Web seminar for Supporting the Emotional Needs of the Gifted. Available at: www.sengifted.org Gallagher SA and Gallagher JJ (2002) Giftedness and Asperger’s Syndrome: A new agenda for education. Understanding our Gifted 4(2): 4–12. Gilliam J (2001) Gilliam Asperger’s Disorder Scale (GADS). Austin, TX: PRO-ED. Harpur L, Lawton M and Fitzgerald M (2004) Succeeding in College with Asperger’s Syndrome: A Student Guide. London: Kingsley. Jackson L (2002) Freaks, Geeks, and Asperger Syndrome: A User Guide to Adolescence. London: Jessica Kingsley. Lindquist CL (2006) The Twice-Exceptional Student with Asperger Syndrome and Giftedness: A Qualitative Survey. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI. Lyons V and Fitzgerald M (2004) Humor with autism and Asperger Syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 34(5): 521–531. Myles BS and Simpson RL (2002) Students with Asperger’s Syndrome: Implications for counselors. Counseling and Human Development 34(7): 1–14. Neihart M (2000) Gifted Children with Asperger’s Syndrome. Gifted Child Quarterly 44(4): 212–230. Neihart M and Poon K (2009) Gifted Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Waco, TX: Prufrock. 52 Gifted Education International 31(1) Downloaded from gei.sagepub.com at CMU Libraries - library.cmich.edu on September 18, 2016 Quill KA (2000) Do, Watch, Listen, Say. Baltimore: Brooks. Saffron SP, Saffron JS and Ellis K (2003) Intervention A B C’s. Topics in Language Disorders 23(2): 154–165. Winner MG (2001) Strategies for Organization: Preparing for Homework and the Real World. San Jose, CA: Social Thinking. Author biographies Terence Paul Friedrichs, PhD, EdD, has spent a varied career of 35 years as a graduate student, teacher, and teacher educator specializing in the education of students who are gifted, disabled, and twice-exceptional. He has taught, among the disabled and twiceexceptional, young people with learning disabilities, emotional/behavioral disorders, mental handicaps, and autism spectrum disorders. In these fields, he has earned 15 teaching and consulting certifications, most recently his teaching credentials in autism spectrum disorders (2010) and twice-exceptional students (2013). He has earned a PhD in gifted and special education from the University of Virginia, has earned an EdD in critical pedagogy from the University of St. Thomas, and is the author of Distinguishing Characteristics of Gifted Students with Disabilities (Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, 2001). Dr. Friedrichs currently serves as director of Friedrichs Education, a one-on-one learning center in Mendota Heights, Minnesota, in which he academically assesses, tutors, and find schools for a full range of twice-exceptional students, from those in kindergarten through the doctoral level. Email: tpfriedrichs@stthomas.edu Michael F Shaughnessy is currently Professor of Educational Studies at Eastern New Mexico University in Portales, New Mexico. He has been a teacher, coach, guidance counselor, school psychologist, and university professor. He has written, edited, or coedited more than 12 books and published more than 500 articles, interviews, book reviews and research studies. His research interests include intelligence testing and personality assessment of gifted children.