Twice-Exceptional Students with Autism in Higher Education: Retention, Graduation, Academic Success Essay

Abstract

Twice-exceptional students with autism face various challenges that directly affect their retention in a higher education institution and eventual graduation. The analysis of primary data and the literature review reveal that the biggest challenge is the assumption by educators that these are highly gifted learners who do not need any form of support.

The study shows that although these learners cannot effectively cope with fast-paced learning and are slow to understand abstract reasoning, fellow students and educators believe they have unique learning abilities that surpass average students. 2-e students who participated in this study explained that they may get some form of support in the library because the librarians are unaware of their academic performance in the classroom.

The study also identified the inability of these learners to share their challenges with their peers and educators as another significant challenge. They explained that they fear the perception that their peers will have towards them when they realize that they have a disability. The findings of this study have outlined various ways in which these learners can be supported to secure their continued enrollment in higher education institutions until graduation.

Providing relevant resources, creating study groups, and having a career center within the institution are some solutions the students offer. They also noted that they need assistance from their professors and that both the educators and their peers should be sensitive to their unique challenges. On the other hand, the professors believe that fostering teacher-student interaction, understanding 2e challenges, sharing responsibilities, parental involvement, and developing the right policies are some essential solutions.

Introduction

Learner-centered education is the paradigm chosen decades ago in the USA and many other countries. This approach has proved to be effective as educators facilitate students’ learning by building on their strengths. Because of this framework, it is now recognized that special programs must be created for a variety of student populations, including exceptional and impaired kids (Baum et al., 2021). New information, such as the inclusion model, has emerged on how students with disabilities can learn and become literate in the general inclusive classroom.

Twice-exceptional students (2e students) (Nese et al., 2017) are a specific population that requires substantial attention as these students display outstanding academic abilities that can become the basis for their further exceptional contribution to the growth of the nation while also often needing support or accommodations to address areas of weakness. Currently, policies such as Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) still determine a student’s eligibility for services. Students can only access services if they have an educational need. However, some 2e students are doing well enough in school and do not meet the criteria for special education despite performing much lower than their actual potential would suggest. The need to include students with disabilities (SWDs) in higher education has become one of the most prominent topics (Musgrove, 2017).

The programs for such students and other populations were not developed all at once but have become a product of an ongoing struggle of educators, researchers, students, parents, and officials to establish increasingly appropriate programming. Twice-exceptional students (also referred to as 2e students) are learners who are gifted and talented while also experiencing some form of challenges that hinder learning, such as autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, developmental disability, a specific learning disability (SLD), or physical impairment (Cain et al., 2019).

The recognition of 2e students with autism first occurred in the 1970s as a distinct disability. Students classified in this category are likely to demonstrate specific characteristics typically associated with some form of giftedness and some other form of disability. These two exceptionalities do not appear to nullify each other. Instead, 2e students are believed to possess a third category of extraordinary characteristics that interact with both giftedness and disability. Thus, researchers recognized that these unique needs vary, and as a result, they cannot be adequately defined by either exceptionality in isolation or a simple combination.

Nese et al. (2017) also noted that for twice exceptional to be actively engaged in the teaching and learning process, educators need to have different approaches to instruction. Charmatz (2018) indicated that significant emphasis is placed on students’ academic performance during their high school years so that they can gain acceptance into colleges and universities. Importantly, no exact definition of giftedness is accepted across the country.

The U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement came up with a general description of this population in 1993 (Cain et al., 2019, p. 1663). Gifted students are defined as “children and youth with outstanding talent [who] perform or show the potential for performing at remarkably high levels of accomplishment when compared with others of their age, experience, or environment” (Cain et al., 2019, p. 1663). However, school districts operationalize giftedness based on their categories and approaches. For instance, in many states, giftedness is assessed based on IQ tests or achievement tests, while in some states, achievements in art or leadership skills are included in this assessment.

The very first steps in the acknowledgment and research into one’s exceptionality within the boundaries of the American educational system were made in the 1920s (Kaufman, 2018, p. 3). In 2002, Marshall University in West Virginia was the first university to implement an autism support program in the United States. Many students on the autism spectrum are as intelligent as their peers but are not considered to be college-ready (Brock, 2018). Hollingsworth, a pioneering educator and researcher, argued that such children should be provided with a more favorable classroom environment to facilitate their learning (Kaufman, 2018). Moreover, Hollingworth and other researchers identified that many of these students had exceptional abilities in some disciplines.

More research about gifted students with disabilities led to further discoveries in this area. The concept of twice-exceptionality was further operationalized and the subject of in-depth research in the mid-1900s (Kaufman, 2018). The academic achievement of students with autism was an area of specific interest for educators. At that, the focus was still on the weaknesses rather than the strengths of these youth, which made the development of specialized interventions seemingly unnecessary.

The primary shift towards the creation of sound interventions for 2e students took place in the 1970’s. One of the milestones in this process was the enactment of the Gifted and Talented Children Educational Assistance Act of 1969, which paved the way for diverse educational programs for 2e students (Lee & Ritchotte, 2018, p. 69). However, it was not until 1988 that the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act was enacted (Lee & Ritchotte, 2018, p. 69). This act created a federal program that funds research and programs for gifted students, including 2e youth. This federal legislation remains the only supported mechanism for differentiated programming to meet the needs of students who excel academically.

As mentioned above, gifted students with any form of disability are regarded as twice-exceptional. Twice-exceptional (2e) learners with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are a growing population, and these students need specific attention to ensure that they will reach their full academic potential. Low social skills, routine-associated rigidity, and exceptional accomplishments in some subjects and mediocre results in others are some traits shared by gifted kids with ASD (Conejeros-Solar et al., 2021). These students have considerable difficulty forming satisfying social connections and relationships with peers and teachers, which may have adverse effects on their academic performance.

Although some research into the features of 2e students with ASD and their needs has been conducted, the focus has often been on descriptions of the characteristics rather than analysis. More research focused on particular interventions that could be applied in large populations is still needed. In addition, researchers tend to concentrate on the K-12 environment while the needs of twice-exceptional learners in the higher education setting are under-researched.

This proposal includes a brief description of the proposed study on the aspects influencing retention and graduation rates of 2e students with ASD in higher education. In the following sections of this proposal, the major details regarding the research in this area are outlined. Included in these paragraphs below are the statement of the problem, research questions, literature review, and methodology (with described research design, sample, conceptual framework, as well as ethical aspects).

Problem Statement

Although the problem has been acknowledged and some steps have been undertaken to address the issue for decades, a disproportionate quantity of twice-exceptional students do not have access to programs facilitating their academic success. There are numerous obstacles to the successful adaptation to and completion of an effective post-secondary education. Twice-exceptional students (2es) are challenged in areas other than academics, such as communicating and interacting with their peers; this can also prevent them from performing effectively (Hong, 2015). Other challenges facing the field include the lack of evidence-based programs, the difficulty of defining giftedness and exceptionality, and the difficulty of assessing students as research participants.

Due to the differences in definitions and difficulties in identifying giftedness, the number of 2e students is difficult to estimate. Ottone-Cross et al. (2018) noted that the existing legislative basis for developing programs for this target population is associated with critical gaps, leading to more questions than answers. For instance, according to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004, a learning disability is:

A disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written that may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations (as cited in Ottone-Cross et al., 2018, p. 173)

However, the definition of “imperfect ability” remains rather obscure, which makes it difficult to assess the achievement and particular needs of many students, especially when it comes to ASD, which necessarily includes symptoms with differing levels of severity. The lack of a clear understanding of the specifics of students’ conditions, their needs, their strengths, and interests is also a severe challenge yet to be addressed.

It also is challenging to evaluate the severity of the issue and the exact number of affected people. In the early 2010s, it was assessed that three million students with some form of disability were also gifted (Lee & Ritchotte, 2018, p.69). Researchers estimate that the rate of such students among the general population is notably high (approximately 5-6%) (Lee & Ritchotte, 2018, p. 69). Research shows that almost 30% of college students with a disability earn a degree, while the graduation rate in the general population is approximately 60% (Snyder et al., 2020, p. 3). It is obvious this topic is worth more attention, as well as the power of each individual potential.

At the same time, the needs of these unique groups of students are not fully met, irrespective of the availability of numerous projects and interventions for 2e students. According to the Civil Rights Data Collection of 2011–2012, 7% of general population students took part in programs for gifted learners, while only 1% of students with disabilities were enrolled in such projects (Lee & Ritchotte, 2018, p. 68).

This disproportionate enrollment can have adverse effects on the academic engagement and achievement of these students, as these learners are often characterized by low self-esteem and motivation (Conejeros-Solar et al., 2021). Twice-exceptional (2e) students usually have to address social issues that prevent them from fully participating in academic life and realizing their full potential. Hence, it is critical to understand the needs of this population, as well as the influences on academic achievement, retention, and graduation.

As mentioned above, researchers have explored some aspects of the problem with a focus on describing physical conditions and academic achievement. Much less attention has been invested into other factors that have an impact on 2e students’ retention, academic achievement, and graduation (Gelbar et al., 2021). In addition to physical conditions (cognitive profile, type of disability, as well as comorbidity) and academic performance, other factors need to be examined. This information is pivotal for creating effective programs to facilitate these learners’ academic growth. It is also pivotal to emphasize that researchers focus on the K-12 educational setting while students’ experiences in higher education and their needs are less explored. This gap should be addressed as 2e students enrolled in higher education often cannot access the necessary services to help them manage their difficulties and reach their fullest potential.

One of the factors affecting the academic outcomes of the group in question is 2e students’ participation in various programs and their access to diverse educational services (Cain et al., 2019; Snyder et al., 2020). The effectiveness of specialized programs for 2e students has received insufficient attention in the research literature. Relationships with peers, as well as the attitudes of 2e students’ friends, are potentially influential factors affecting the target group’s graduation and retention rates, along with their academic successes (Conejeros-Solar et al., 2021).

The correct identification of the profiles, weaknesses, strengths, and needs of 2e students are among the factors that may have a significant influence on these learners’ academic outcomes (Villanueva & Huber, 2019). These major areas are at the core of the present study aimed at exploring the factors that have an effect on 2e students’ retention and graduation rates, as well as their academic achievement.

Research Questions

The purpose of this study is to explore the impacts on the retention and graduation rates, as well as the educational attainment, of twice-exceptional autist learners. Both qualitative and quantitative research designs have been used to examine the needs and uniqueness of 2e students (Gelbar et al., 2021). A qualitative research method will enable this researcher to focus more on the overall issue and better understand the research problem. Qualitative studies seek to explore the feelings and beliefs through a focus on the lived experiences of the participants. As such, qualitative research is most appropriate to meet the goals of this study.

Because this study is aimed at analyzing the circumstances that influence people’s behavior, people’s views on the matter should be central to the data collection. In simple terms, the characteristics as seen by the target group should be explored in detail, as these challenges are perceived as the most difficult to overcome. In order to address the aim of this study, it is necessary to pose open-ended interview questions that enable researchers to analyze large scopes of aspects of the problem and have deep insights into the issue (Cohen et al., 2017). The primary focus will be on the experiences of learners as they would be expected to have the most remarkable insights into their own experiences.

However, other stakeholders’ perspectives can also add more insights into the issues under study. In addition to the views of 2e students, it is essential to examine the opinions of educators who contribute to these learners’ academic success. Educators are in close contact with twice-exceptional students and follow their academic progress, providing educational services and supporting and encouraging these students. Educators are also the ones to assess the needs of the target population and develop or advise on the program to be used by each student based on their unique features.

Educators may also notice some factors that affect 2e students’ choices but remain unacknowledged by the latter. Administrative and legislative aspects are more apparent to the faculty as students see the results of diverse laws, acts, policies, and standards. Teachers may provide their evaluations regarding the effectiveness of these standards and legislation. Therefore, the perceptions, attitudes, and assessments of educators can shed light on critical areas that can be instrumental in the development of effective programs for 2e students.

Based on the aforementioned issues, the following research questions have been developed to guide the current study:

What are the apprehended impediments and/or assets for academic achievement of twice-exceptional ASD students in the higher education setting

• as seen by students themselves?
• as seen by educators?

Literature Review

Defining and Identifying Twice Exceptional Learners

For many years, researchers have examined how students’ giftedness affects their academic achievement. Some areas, such as cognitive, social, and emotional growth, have received the most attention among researchers, while numerous gaps still persist. This study focuses on twice-exceptional students, so the scope of this literature review is confined to this population. The problem of the definition of giftedness and even particular types of disability has been a common topic for past decades.

Cain et al. (2019) traced the development of some definitions used in the U.S. legislative field and noted that the existing definition is rather vague. The identification of giftedness and sometimes the disability is linked to specific difficulties as well. This phenomenon is referred to as “masking” and prevents many twice-exceptional students from accessing necessary services (Ottone-Cross et al., 2018, p. 173). As a result, such students may not realize their full potential and must address their issues independently.

Fullan’s change theory is an effort for schools to improve education throughout the United States. His change theory covers three areas of change:

1. New materials
2. New behaviors/practices
3. New programs/ accommodation.

Indeed, these areas of change may occur through preparation programs, faculty meetings, and effective leadership. Fullan’s change theory focuses on preparation programs for educators’ professional learning communities and effective leadership, which are essential in identifying the critical elements of the inclusive classroom setting. Cain et al. (2019) noted that educators in different states use different methods to assess giftedness, increasing the apparent confusion. It is still unclear whether purely academic outcomes, such as IQ tests or particular skills tests, are sufficient to identify gifted learners or can be effective whether such aspects as leadership skills or creativity should be a part of this assessment.

Ottone-Cross et al. (2018) also noted that another challenge to be addressed in identifying 2e students is that they often use compensatory strategies that make their disability less evident. Fullan (2010) noted that higher education institutions must provide training through professional learning communities to use effective teaching strategies in inclusive classrooms.

The identification of 2e students’ disability and its severity and potential impact has been a matter of research with no particular paradigm unifying research efforts. Snyder et al. (2020) noted that several approaches to identifying disability are utilized currently. However, these frameworks are imperfect, notably apparent in their failure to detect the specific needs of 2e students.

In addition to the masking effect, other obstacles to accessing services and investing the necessary effort into the study of the phenomenon exist. Nolte (2018) noted that masking is a challenging issue. Still, the relatively low incidence of giftedness and disability makes the matter of wanting to address it reasonably common among researchers and practitioners. At the same time, Nolte (2018) mentioned that in one of her post-secondary studies, the prevalence of 2e students in one of the classes was as high as 15% (p. 199). Therefore, the need for further investigation of diverse aspects of 2e students’ academic outcomes and instructional practice they have received has been acknowledged.

Fullan (2010) believes constant learning and training should be the core of every job description. Learning should not be an afterthought; rather, it should be a continuous core focus of building a solid school community. The teaching practice of whole-group instruction is not tolerated due to the wide variety of learning styles within a given classroom (Srivastava, De Boer, & Pijl, 2017). The need for higher education professors to accept and embrace a more rigorous curriculum and the inclusion of students with disabilities seems troublesome for some educators because some professors are challenged to meet the educational needs of 2e students (Kurth & Forber-Pratt, 2017). Inclusive practices are standard for many educators throughout the state; however, great emphasis is placed on professors’ standards and design, the resources used, and how instruction is implemented. (Choi et. al., 2017).

Taub et al. (2017) have noted that some colleges and universities throughout the United States have made tremendous progress in closing the achievement gap between non-disabled students and SWDs due to the solid inclusive initiative practice that includes differentiation of instruction. An inclination to educate students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms has increased. The need to support and strengthen the academic requirements, social skills, and emotional success of students with disabilities has become even more critical (Qvortrup & Qvortrup, 2018).

It is clear that over the years, some colleges and universities have implemented several extensive, research-based practices to support the inclusion model. There is substantial research behind evidence-based practice, mainly showing positive results. This approach is aligned with my students’ needs. Lynch (2017) revealed that programs are developed with a rationale based on high-quality research or a positive evaluation that will likely improve students learning or other relevant outcomes. Therefore, integration demands college and university administrators to create resources and make arrangements in schools for exceptional students, primarily those commonly labeled as students with disabilities, by practicing remedial education and implementing shared learning (Musgrove, 2017).

Inclusive teaching practices are geared to create a learning culture for all students, regardless of their disabilities. Even though disabilities range in different categories, for example, some disabilities and special learning needs can stem from psychological, social, cultural, physical, and linguistic factors, professors’ lesson plans and instructions must be geared to support the different types of learning (Choi et al., 2017). Inclusive education is also beneficial for non-disabled students. Inclusion education is a legal, moral, and civil right for students with disabilities. More often than ever, many school districts are leaning towards inclusion. The inclusion classroom consists of a general education teacher and a special education teacher, and students with disabilities receive instruction in the same classroom as their non-disabled peers.

Hong (2015) stated that when non-disabled students provided peer support to their disabled peers in an inclusive learning environment, they demonstrated positive academic outcomes. These non-disabled students are more likely to increase their academic achievement, complete assignments, and fully engage in class participation. Both twice-exceptional students with disabilities and their non-disabled peers can experience difficulty learning throughout the semester.

However, college and university professors must assess their instructional strategies and course requirements, make changes wherever needed, and address the specific learning goals for non-disabled students and SWDs (Kozleski & Choi, 2018). Nilsen (2018) has indicated that teachers’ beliefs, collaboration, and differentiation of instructions are vital components when considering the success of inclusive practice. For many students with disabilities, the key to a successful inclusive classroom lies with adequate teacher instructions, including appropriate adaptations, accommodations, and modifications (Kurth & Forber-Pratt, 2017).

Recent Trends in Research on 2e Students

Although the attention to identifying 2e students is still insufficient, as noted by researchers and practitioners, the interest in this area is increasing. In their systematic review, Gelbar et al. (2021) analyzed articles published between 1996 and 2019 and noted that the number of studies addressing the need for post-secondary education for 2e students has been gradually growing. Approximately 63% of the articles reviewed were empirical, while almost 38% were conceptual or reviews (Gelbar et al., 2021, p. 1). Gelbar et al. (2021) noted that most of the studies addressing the needs of 2e students were descriptive, while some were correlational and others were case studies. The primary focus of the reviewed articles was on the characteristics of twice-exceptional students and identification approaches that have been used in the literature.

In general, researchers provide descriptions of the attributes of 2e students that emphasize their giftedness. Gelbar et al. (2021) add that in many cases, these studies, which focus on academic programs for students with special needs and these educational services, are aimed at disabled students. This population’s giftedness is often left out, and researchers, as well as practitioners or students themselves, have quite a one-sided perspective, paying little attention to their potential giftedness. As mentioned above, masking plays a vital role in this process, allowing the stakeholders to concentrate on a limited scope of student needs. It is stressed that more attention should be paid to assessing the existing programs and interventions, which can help introduce effective incentives that will facilitate the learning of the target population.

Factors Affecting 2E Students’ Academic Outcomes

The cognitive and demographic differences of 2e students are some of the most influential factors affecting these learners’ academic outcomes and graduation rates (Ottone-Cross et al., 2018). It is acknowledged that twice-exceptional students’ psychosocial differences considerably impact their performance and academic achievement (Ottone-Cross et al., 2018). Notably, such students often excel in some disciplines while having average or even mediocre achievement in other areas. Ottone-Cross et al. (2018) added that these difficulties hurt students’ motivation and overall performance at school.

Cain et al. (2019) stated that demographic variables, giftedness, and available educational services for such populations are the predictors of 2e learners’ academic success. It is noteworthy that these researchers concentrated on 2e students with ASD exclusively. According to Cain et al. (2019), the twice-exceptional students with ASD who find themselves in a favorable environment (with available services, family support, and socioeconomic opportunities) tend to display higher results in completing post-secondary education when compared to the general population. These students also perform better compared to 2e learners with other disabilities like attention deficit hyperactivity (ADHD), who do not have the same support.

The study by Cain et al. (2019) compared the GPA of high school and college students who were screened as twice-exceptional and were given extra services, extra academic support, family support, and socioeconomic opportunities compared to regular gifted and average students. From a sample size of 32741 college and high school students, the academic performance of students who were screened twice exceptionally earned a significantly higher GPA than those who were screened as just gifted or average.

This study provides valuable insights into the matter as the researchers traced the academic performance of 2e learners with ASD across several years (during primary and middle school). However, more research is required to examine the factors influencing the academic performance and retention rate of 2e students, even though the sample size was very big (19,000 people). Moreover, the focus was on preschool through middle school students, while college students were omitted, and their academic performance was not traced.

Snyder et al. (2020) noted that academic skills, goals, and academic efficacy serve as predictors of 2e students’ retention in college. At the same time, low academic motivation has a negative impact on these learners’ overall academic performance and retention rates (Snyder et al., 2020). These researchers compared the GPAs of the academic performance and retention rate of twice-exceptional students who excel in mathematics and those who are advanced in reading.

It was found that the former group was characterized by a higher retention rate, which is also associated with these learners’ motivation. Not choosing the right major in an area of strength might significantly impact the student academic achievement, graduation, and retention rates of twice-exceptional students (Snyder et al., 2020). Hence, the discipline and 2e students’ academic interests can be seen as influential factors that impact their academic achievement and retention/graduation rates.

Social aspects have also received considerable attention in academia, and the role of families, educators, and peers has been explored. Armstrong (2018) noted that 2e students’ resilience and uniqueness are essential to their academic journey. In particular, family support and the involvement of educators, friends, and other stakeholders (for example, counselors) substantially influence 2e learners’ academic achievement and retention rates.

The study focused on identifying inhibitors and facilitators of the educational journey of twice-exceptional students at a selective institution enrolled in higher learning. For data collection, 13 qualified students, nine high school and four college students were selected based on their uniqueness and ability to articulate. Questionnaires and interview techniques were implemented to elicit responses. Although the study by Armstrong (2018) included a tiny sample, as only the experiences of four college students were analyzed, it contributes substantially to the current knowledge base on the matter. An important piece of information is the researcher’s identification of the most often talked subjects among 2e college students.

The study by Conejeros-Solar et al. (2021) is remarkable due to its focus on 2estudents’ peers rather than students themselves or their teachers and parents. These researchers emphasized that twice-exceptional students’ closest friends contribute to their academic success by providing psychological and emotional support to the vulnerable population. The relationships with peers have been acknowledged as influential factors affecting the educational success of 2e students. More research in this area is critical as the study by Conejeros-Solar et al. (2021) involved only 17 people, and those were all middle school students.

Existing Gaps in the Literature

The review above shows that increasing attention to 2e students’ academic achievement and retention has translated into discovering important aspects of the problem. However, multiple gaps are still apparent and need to be addressed to develop practical solutions to the issues and facilitate this population’s academic success. First, it is vital to build a reliable methodology for the early detection of giftedness and incapacity. It is critical to ensure the introduced methods are rigid and can be applied in various settings, such as K-12 or higher education environments.

In addition, more attention should be paid to the experiences and outcomes of students in higher education facilities. The primary focus is on K-12 students and those transitioning to college. However, a growing number of twice-exceptional students in higher education and their comparatively low retention rate suggest that effective educational programs to boost these learners’ academic success are needed (Gelbar et al., 2021).

Moreover, it is also apparent that the programs available at colleges mainly aim at disabled students who are not gifted. Learners who are 2e students have limited access to programs helping them cope with their needs, especially when it comes to acquiring social skills (Gelbar et al., 2021). At the same time, Gelbar et al. (2021) have found that twice-exceptional students tend to lack these skills to transition to the professional area and succeed professionally. Also, the effort aimed at helping such students transition to the new stage (professional area) is insufficient while being specifically challenging.

As it follows from the current literature review, most studies describe 2e students’ characteristics. However, much less attention is paid to the factors affecting twice-exceptional students’ academic attainment, retention, and graduation rates. Quite a sporadic effort has been made in this direction, and only some qualitative studies have explored this aspect of the problem. Some of the factors that have been highlighted include the psychosocial features of 2e students, the support of families, educators, friends, and counselors, and the participation in educational services aimed at helping the target population. These three significant domains will be included in this study, while other factors will be analyzed as defined by the participants.

Method

Conceptual Framework

This study aimed to investigate the factors influencing graduation and retention rates and academic performance of 2e students with ASD. In order to address the goal of this research, it is critical to conceptualize the variables and consider the relationships between them (Cohen et al., 2017). Student retention and graduation rates are measurable academic outcomes (see Figure 1). Other variables like test scores, performance, and participation in miscellaneous educational settings are excluded and could be explored in future studies. These variables have been chosen as dependent variables influenced by several factors.

At this point, it is necessary to note that giftedness and disability (ASD) are highlighted separately to ensure that both domains receive the attention required. As mentioned above, only one of these areas is explored in detail, while the other remains understudied. Identifying the two aspects to consider will be instrumental in identifying the factors affecting students’ academic outcomes.

Psychological and social aspects, such as family, peers, faculty, and legislative factors, were explored in this study. Psychological characteristics include the nature of the student’s giftedness, the severity of ASD, resilience, and other psychological traits such as personality, motivation, and self-esteem. Among social identity, the following were central to this study: ethnicity, socioeconomic status of the family, cultural differences, and others.

Family (relatives, guardians, and so on) and peers (close friends, group mates, former school classmates, and acquaintances) are also influential factors to be analyzed in detail. Faculty who were considered in this study include educators, administrators, and counselors who helped students succeed academically and socially. Finally, legislative factors are also influential as the existing policies and standards shape the relationships between students and faculty and the provision of educational services, including programs boosting academic performance.

Qualitative Research Design and Approach

Since the focus of this study was on people’s attitudes and opinions, qualitative research methods were employed to address the research aims. The primary goal of the qualitative research design was to elicit meanings, attitudes, opinions, and experiences (Cohen et al., 2017). In the interview process, participants answered questions and shared their views on some matters or commented on their experiences that helped them understand some phenomena.

Sailor et al. (2018) defined a qualitative research study as one whose aim is to explore and understand the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem. In order to understand the factors that influence student academic outcomes, interview questions were developed about the participants’ views on the matter. Using this method required a wide range of interconnected processes, such as behavioral factors, with the hope of getting a better understanding of the research subject. Qualitative research also allowed the researcher to recognize important themes and relationships as the data had been collected. Sailor et al. (2018) noted that a qualitative research design could be defined as subjective.

The phenomenological method is also associated with people’s lived experiences and was used to explore the participants’ perspectives. Phenomenological studies are concerned with lived experiences and people’s feelings and emotions regarding these instances and were appropriate for this particular study. They primarily focused on finding answers to address the whys and how of the research phenomenon in question; they are based on the outcome and the results collected in a written format (Ward, 2018). Qualitative researchers observe people in their settings and interact with them on their terms, believing the best way to understand a central phenomenon is to study it in its context and become engrossed (Brock, 2018).

A qualitative study is a kind of research that explores and gives more in-depth information and new insights into real-life situations (Brock, 2018). Brock (2018) also defined a qualitative study as an investigation of a phenomenon that occurs in a bounded context that cannot be understood outside of the context in which it takes place. A basic qualitative design is most appropriate for exploring the changes in instruction and extra support in an inclusion college classroom setting because the basic qualitative method is used to understand a practical problem (Ward, 2018).

A basic qualitative study helps researchers gain a holistic understanding of a central phenomenon. One of the primary methods for a basic qualitative research study is the collection of data by interviewing the participants (Brock, 2018). The researcher better understands the central phenomena by conducting interviews and using video and audiotapes. Researchers usually use a basic qualitative method when they do not have extensive knowledge about the problem (Brock, 2018). Ward (2018) suggested that a basic qualitative study methodology broadens the avenue for deeper investigation in which different complementary data will be collected on the same topic.

Participants

Participants in this qualitative study included higher education teaching faculty and twice-exceptional higher education students. The professors who participated in the study met the following criteria: All the faculty members had experience teaching 2e students in the past 3 years.

In addition, it was necessary to include college professors with two or more years of experience teaching at a college level and experience in identifying students with learning differences. Experienced college professors served a significant role in ensuring that twice-exceptional students had accessible education by building supportive courses that foster student engagement. The twice-exceptional students in the study had at least two years of college experience, were diagnosed with autism, and were classified as twice exceptional.

The study was based on a Northeastern University that had implemented the inclusion model to meet the needs of twice-exceptional students. The participants were selected from Northeastern University’s admission department, which had students registered as twice-exceptional students with autism. The invitation was voluntary and accepted by students who were interested in participating.

The faculty members employed at the Northeastern University received separate invitations to participate in the study. A total population sampling method was utilized to recruit the educators. For this qualitative study, five higher-education professors and 10 twice-exceptional students with autism participated.

Study Measures

The interview process for asking questions took place using the Zoom platform. The interview questions were based on the literature and explicitly related to the research questions. The open-ended questions were clear and concise to avoid any ambiguity. Using open-ended questions led to more accurate answers and helped the researcher to get a better understanding of the study. Open-ended questions produced long-form typed responses that revealed participants’ opinions and experiences.

The researcher used different interview questions for the students with ASD and the educators. The questions for the students were aimed to explore perceived barriers or any support for academic achievement and opportunities they had experienced when accessing higher education. The interview questions were developed to obtain information on educators’ experience in instructing students with ASD.

Additionally, the interview questions asked the educators how they could support students with ASD in acquiring education effectively like their counterparts who taught students without the condition. Most of the interview questions focused on the participants’ lived experiences. Thus, it enabled the researcher to obtain firsthand information.

As a reference, the researcher used data from previous related studies as a basis for analyzing the results of this study. To determine consistency and differences between previous studies, the researcher compared their results with those of earlier studies. By comparing the research findings with the data from previous studies, the researcher assessed the accuracy of the research and identified whether it aligns with the general theory established by previous literature. Additionally, the researcher analyzed the limitations of the earlier studies to improve this research and ensure it addressed all the essential aspects that the previous studies had not addressed. This form of reference enabled the researcher to set realistic objectives for the research and develop practical ways to achieve such objectives.

Procedure

Before selecting participants and collecting data, the researcher obtained approval to conduct the study from the Fairleigh Dickinson University Institutional Review Board (IRB). The researcher also got permission from a private northeastern university that offers an education program geared toward gifted students with autism and Asperger’s Syndrome. This private northeastern university is known for supporting 2e students and their educators. The university embraces meaningful academic experiences and the development of essential skills that include independence, social-emotional maturity, practical communication, and career readiness. The primary purpose of the program was to support neurodiverse students.

As part of the university’s program initiatives, it aimed to ensure that neurodiverse students (specifically those with Autism Spectrum Disorder) had a positive and fulfilling college experience by nurturing students’ talents, creating a sense of cohesiveness, and connecting them with community resources. The program’s framework was to support a structure that covers the areas of academic skills, executive functioning skills, and social-communication skills. To be eligible to apply for the program, there were specific criteria students had to adhere to be considered for acceptance. Students had to possess a high school degree, be neurodiverse, have very high academic potential (twice-exceptional), and have an academic profile commensurate with the honors program. An extracurricular activity had to be part of the student’s schedule.

After the approval was granted, the researcher contacted one of the professors in the School of Education department from the said private Northeastern University. The professor from the northeastern university sent out invitation letters and asked for volunteers to participate in the study. Interested participants contacted the researcher. In separate emails, the professors and twice-exceptional students who accepted the invitation received a confirmation.

sProfessors and students who wished to volunteer their time for the study were asked to complete and sign a consent form. The goal of the consent form was to provide guidelines for the responsible conduct of the research and ensure that there was no risk to the participants. The researcher informed the participants that their participation would not be compensated and withdrawal could take place at any time without reprisal. However, only the participants who completed the study received remuneration.

Upon receiving the consent form from each participant, the researcher sent out computer-generated questionnaires. Participants’ responses were considered confidential and were placed in a file on the computer with password access to minimize risk to participants. Confidentiality was a concern in this research because of the possible negative effect a lack of it could have on participants in terms of their careers (Sauer & Jorgensen, 2016). The researcher reassured the participants that any information that they disclosed had to remain confidential.

Data Analysis

The researcher employed thematic data analysis to scrutinize the research findings. Thematic analysis was the ideal form of analysis in this case because the research involved qualitative data-collection methods. This analysis enabled the researcher to accurately identify common factors in the participants’ responses and noted other patterns essential to making accurate conclusions about the subject of study. In this study, the researcher employed thematic analysis to evaluate the findings from the survey and questionnaire responses to identify unanimity in the challenges experienced by ASD students and educators in their school life. Additionally, the researcher used this form of analysis to establish the conformity of the findings to the general theories about ASD.

Thematic data analysis required specific steps to be considered to interpret the research findings accurately. According to Braun and Clarke, researchers must employ six essential steps when using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). These steps include familiarization, coding, generating themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes, and writing a final report of the interpretations.

Firstly, the familiarization step required the researcher to read through the data and understand its content and general overview. In this study, the researcher read the findings generated from the interview questions to understand the common themes, whether they were challenges, support, or opportunities for students with ASD and how their teachers handled them.

Secondly, the coding step required the researcher to highlight the data’s essential features and associate them with unique phrases referred to as codes. These specific codes were then identified and related to data within the findings. This step gave the researcher an overview of the findings and made it possible to identify common factors and patterns in the text. In this study, the researcher developed specific codes from the findings that were used to determine the patterns in the various responses by the participants. For instance, some of the codes that were essential in this case included phrases such as “funds,” “resources,” “knowledge,” and “support.”

Thirdly, the researcher used the codes developed from the previous steps to generate themes for the data. Several codes combined to form a prominent subject described by the text (Braun & Clarke, 2006). In this study, the researcher identified related codes and generated themes explaining barriers twice-exceptional students experience. For instance, some of the themes developed by the researchers include inappropriate resources, insufficient funding, and lack of knowledge.

Fourthly, the researcher needed to review the potential themes by comparing them with the data to ensure that they represent the data description. This step allowed the researcher to add new themes and eliminate those that do not conform to the data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). In this study, the researcher reviewed themes to ensure that they conform to the specific concept of ASD students.

Lastly, the research named the final themes and defined them according to the content of the research findings. The themes developed at this step had to be easily understandable and had to adequately describe the patterns identified in the findings. The researcher analyzed the results by outlining the research objectives, questions, methodology, and conclusions, highlighting the themes. This step was essential in informing the target audience whether the research objectives were met and whether the research questions were answered.

Findings

The previous chapter explained the method that will be used to collect and analyze data from primary sources. In this chapter, the focus is to provide detailed findings made from the respondents’ primary data analysis. Twice-exceptional students with autism are considered gifted learners who can perform better than their average peers. However, it is equally important to note that these students have disabilities that may affect their learning process.

Factors such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, specific learning disabilities, and developmental disabilities are unique challenges that affect these students. It means that although they are gifted, they face unique challenges that make it necessary for them to be given special attention. When these challenges are ignored, and they are not offered the appropriate assistance in and out of the classroom, they may feel frustrated, and some may consider dropping out of school before their graduation. Various factors would affect their retention and graduation rates in higher education institutions.

The purpose of this study is to examine the factors that affect the graduation and retention rates and the academic achievement of 2e students with ASD. Two measurable academic outcomes are student retention and graduation rates. Other outcomes, such as test scores, performance, participation in various educational venues, and so on, are not included and can become a matter of exploration in further studies. In this chapter, the researcher will focus on answering the two primary questions that were presented in the introduction chapter of the paper. The researcher analyzed the findings by describing the research aims, the research question, the methodology, and the research results, in which the themes are discussed.

What are the perceived obstacles and/or help for academic performance of twice-exceptional students with ASD in higher education institutions as seen by learners themselves?

Twice-exceptional students face numerous challenges that may affect their ability to remain in an institution of higher learning and finally graduate. Although data were to be analyzed qualitatively, the researcher considered it necessary to conduct a preliminary quantitative analysis to determine the problem’s existence. The researcher asked the students if they received any support in and out of the classroom. The response that these students gave was computed in an Excel spreadsheet, and the figure below shows the outcome. It shows that these students rarely receive any support in school. There is a general perception that they are gifted students who do not need any support.

The professors and fellow students do not consider them as learners with special needs who should be given special attention. However, these students noted that they would get some form of support out of the classroom, especially in the school library. It is necessary to note that these librarians do not understand the unique challenges that 2e students have. They are unaware that these are gifted students who perform better than average learners. As such, one can assume that the assistance they get in the library can be attributed to the fact that these librarians are unaware of their potential. It is possible that if they were aware of their capabilities, their perception would be different.

When reviewing the literature, it emerged that 2e students face numerous challenges in institutions of higher learning. Unlike in high school, where some would receive personalized attention from teachers who clearly understood their conditions, things are entirely different at the college level. The researcher wanted to identify specific challenges that these learners face. In addressing the question above, the researcher collected data from the 2e students. They were asked various questions to determine the difficulties that they face and the possible support that they may need to ensure that they are retained at these institutions until they graduate.

Table 1 below identifies the barriers to academic achievement of twice-exceptional students with ASD in a higher education setting. It also identifies the support these students need to ensure they can complete their education and finally graduate from these institutions. The analysis presented the questions, selected quotes that directly answered the question, developed codes from the quotes, and finally identified the relevant themes.

Twice-exceptional students are in the best position to explain the unique challenges that they experience in a higher education setting. Some of them would opt to hide the pain and frustration that they face as they struggle to cope with this new environment after graduating from high school. In Table 1 above, the researcher presents themes that directly state the challenges that these students face and the support that they feel is necessary to facilitate them and enable them to achieve success in their academics.

Barriers to Academic Achievement: Students’ Perspective

Table 1 above presents themes that directly explain the barriers that twice-exceptional learners face in their everyday academic lives in higher education. Cain et al. (2019) explain that the main challenge that emerges when handling these students is that they are so gifted that stakeholders forget that they are also special needs learners. As such, the emphasis is placed on their unique capabilities, while their weaknesses are ignored. The following are the themes that emerged, which explain the barriers that may limit their ability to complete and graduate from higher learning institutions.

Theme 1: Assumption That 2e Students Do Not Need Help

When analyzing the primary data, one of the common themes that emerged was that there is a general assumption that twice-exceptional students do not need any form of support. These students explained that they are viewed as highly gifted learners who can quickly figure things out by themselves. The assumption is highly prevalent in classrooms where professors are aware of their above-average performance. They believe that these learners’ unique capabilities to grasp concepts taught in class mean that they can always do the research even if they are not taught everything in class.

This assumption is a significant barrier to the retention and graduation of these students. They have unique needs that make them special from other students. These needs are ignored, and this causes frustration as they have to find ways of solving the problems. If they fail to address these problems, these students can quickly drop out of school as they feel ignored.

Theme 2: Inability to Engage with Other Students

The students noted that sometimes, they are unable to interact with other students in their classroom. Josephson et al. (2018) argue that twice-exceptional students tend to be highly sensitive, and when they realize that they are in an environment where they can be physically or verbally attacked, they prefer keeping to themselves. This claim was confirmed by the students who took part in the study. They explained that sometimes, they feel other students are insensitive to their unique needs and challenges. As such, they find it difficult to interact and engage with them in a meaningful way.

The inability to engage with other students negatively affects their academic performance. They are unable to discuss concepts taught in class to enhance their learning. They cannot get the assistance of their colleagues in addressing specific academic assignments. They feel alone and secluded from the community. When the problem persists, and the student is unable to cope with the associated stress, they can easily drop out of school before graduation.

Theme 3: Inability to Articulate My Learning Needs

The analysis of the data identified another significant barrier, which was the inability of these students to articulate their learning needs. These learners are uniquely talented, but they also have special needs. The fact that they are not categorized as special needs students means that they do not get the remarkable support that other students with specific disabilities receive.

Although the institutions are partly to blame for the existence of this problem, one can assume that they do not fully understand the nature of this category of learners. These twice-exceptional students must articulate their learning needs. The more these unique needs are articulated, the more the institutions and the professors will understand what they need to do. Unfortunately, these students explained that they find it difficult to articulate these challenges. It means that they are rarely addressed.

Theme 4: Fear of Revealing My Disability Because of Negative Perception

The respondents noted that another significant barrier is the fear of revealing their disability, as it may result in negative perceptions. This response clearly shows that, unlike other disabled learners whose disabilities can be seen, sometimes it may not be possible for a professor or fellow students to realize that a learner has unique needs. It explains why many professors view these learners as gifted students who do not need any support.

It becomes necessary for these students to demonstrate their unique conditions to their peers and professors so that they can get the help that they need. However, they fear attracting negative perceptions instead of getting the support they need. To avoid the sympathy and negativity associated with those who live with a disability, these learners choose not to disclose their condition. In such cases, it means that they are less likely to get the support that they need.

Theme 5: Challenges in Processing Abstract Reasoning and Coping with Fast-Pace Learning

Twice-exceptional students sometimes have a problem when it comes to processing abstract reasoning and coping with fast-paced learning. This problem is uniquely worsened by the perception of professors that these students are highly gifted. The irony, in this case, is that although their abstract reasoning and ability to cope with fast-paced learning may be lower than the average student, the professors assume that these learners are more capable than the average students. Although these students need help in these two areas, those who should offer the assistance believe that they are so capable that they are the ones to provide help to other slow learners in their class.

Support for Academic Achievement: Students’ Perspective

There is a need to assist these students to ensure that their retention and graduation rates are as high as possible. As Hulsey et al. (2022) observe, twice-exceptional students have unique challenges that should be addressed by different stakeholders. They have to be viewed as uniquely talented learners, but they have some unique challenges that should be addressed by the relevant stakeholders. The following are the main themes that emerged when trying to find a possible solution to the identified challenges.

Theme 1: We Need Resources

The 2e students interviewed in this study explained that they need resources to facilitate their learning in institutions of higher learning. It may not be possible for the professor’s pace of teaching to be dictated by one or two students with special needs in a class of over 100 learners (Gilman, 2020). These students admit that in such cases, they must be presented with learning materials that can assist them outside of the classroom. They should have access to physical library resources and online databases where they can conduct further research. The availability of these resources will ensure that they do not wholly rely on their professors to learn new concepts.

Theme 2: We Need a Career Center

The students noted that there is a need for career centers to be created to assist them when they join these institutions of higher learning. The unique abilities and inabilities of these students may make them better candidates for specific careers than others. In these career centers, they can get a counselor who will take time to understand these unique abilities and advise them accordingly about the appropriate course that they should take. Once the course is selected, they can get assistance throughout their college life on how best they should position themselves to achieve success in their selected career. These career centers will eliminate cases where special needs learner chooses a course that is not suitable for them based on their abilities and disabilities.

Theme 3: We Need Support from Professors

The participating students noted that they needed support from their professors. Some of the unique challenges that they face can only be addressed by their professor. For instance, they explained that sometimes they have a problem with abstract reasoning. Others noted that they have a problem with fast-paced learning. These challenges require the attention of the professors. These educators should know that some of their students have limited abilities when it comes to specific areas of learning. As such, they need to take their time to explain some of these concepts. They should also take some time with these students to help them overcome various academic challenges that they face.

Theme 4: We Need Clear Instructions

The students who took part in this study also explained that there is a need for clear instructions as a way of assisting them in overcoming the challenges that they face in their learning environment. A respondent explained that it is not easy for them to engage other students when undertaking their assignments. As such, they get frustrated when the instructions are not articulated clearly. The respondent advised that there is a need for the professors to ensure that they give simple and clear instructions for the benefit of 2e students.

Theme 5: We Need Study Groups

The analysis of primary data also indicated that it is necessary to have study groups for these students. Thompson et al. (2018) state that it is not possible for a student to fully understand a concept when it is taught for the first time in the classroom. They need to conduct private studies and engage in group discussions to enhance their understanding. The problem is that some of these learners may have a problem forming such study groups. Professors should assist in creating these groups and ensuring that individuals with varying capabilities work as a unit to enhance their ability to achieve academic success.

Theme 6: We Need Professors and Peers to Be Sensitive to Our Challenges

The 2e students who took part in this study noted that they feel some of their professors and peers are insensitive to their challenges. They explained that some of the teachers do not realize that they have a challenge with issues that other students would consider normal, such as shouting in the classroom when students are making noise. While other students will absorb that shock easily and concentrate, these special needs learners will remain shaken for a while, and their state of mind may be unstable for the entire lesson. Fellow students should also avoid being treated as highly gifted learners who do not deserve any form of academic assistance.

Theme 7: We Need to Share Information

The analysis of primary data also identified the need to share information as another major theme in the study. In a highly competitive learning environment, it is common for some students to avoid sharing information as a way of gaining an edge over their classmates (Reis et al., 2022). However, the respondents noted that such practices only hinder the ability of learners to enhance their skills. A student will improve their understanding of a concept when they share information with classmates. The process of sharing also enhances their experience. By empowering their peers, they end up empowering themselves.

What are the recognized hindrances and/or support for academic achievement of twice-exceptional learners with ASD in higher education, as seen by educators?

Findings presented in the first question addressed barriers and the needed support for academic achievement of twice-exceptional students with ASD in higher education environments as seen by the affected students. In this question, the focus is to address the same thing but from the perspective of the professors who have directly handled 2e students. The strategy was considered adequate because educators can identify barriers and the relevant support that these students need but are not aware of for various reasons. As McClurg et al. (2021), sometimes one does not even realize that they have a weakness until someone else helps them to identify it. The analysis started by determining if these educators feel 2e students get the necessary support that they need at school.

Figure 2 below shows the outcome of the analysis of the responses of the educators interviewed in this study. They both agreed that these students do not receive the adequate support that they need to achieve academic excellence. They confirmed the claim that various barriers affect the ability of these learners to achieve success in institutions of higher learning.

Before conducting the qualitative analysis, the researcher wanted to determine if the educators have the correct set of skills and experience to handle these uniquely talented students. Figure 3 below shows the outcome of the analysis of data that was obtained from the participants. It shows that 100% of those who took part in the investigation noted that they have experience and knowledge in handling students with special needs. As such, they have the authority to explain the challenges that they face and propose possible solutions that can help address the problems.

After the statistical analysis is meant to understand the severity of the problem and the ability of the participants to provide an informed opinion on the issue, it is necessary to present findings from the qualitative analysis that was conducted. In this context, the professors were expected to explain the barriers that can affect the ability of 2e students to remain in college and complete their studies, as well as the support that they need to overcome these challenges. Table 2 below shows themes that emerged after analyzing the responses obtained from the participants in a qualitative analysis.

Barriers to Academic Achievement: Students’ Perspective

The educators can identify unique barriers to academic achievements for 2e students. They have been interacting with these students and, as such, can help address these challenges to ensure that they are retained in institutions of higher learning until they graduate. The following themes emerged during the analysis of primary data obtained from the professors.

Theme 1: Inability to Give 2e Learners Personal Attention Because of Staff Deficit

The educators identified the inability to give 2e learners personal attention as one of the most significant barriers. They explained that these students have unique needs that require personalized attention. However, these institutions have a staff deficit. As such, they are unable to attend to the needs of individual students. Sometimes, they have to ignore the requests made by these students because of the shortage of faculty members.

One of the respondents explained that besides the staff deficit, another reason why these learners cannot get personal attention from teachers is that their unique condition is not apparent to the teachers. Most of these students rarely articulate their challenges. They fear that they may be ridiculed or perceived negatively instead of getting the support that they want. In such cases, the professors do not even realize that these students have a serious problem that may directly influence their retention and graduation rates from institutions of higher learning.

Theme 2: Limited Understanding of Special Needs of 2e Students

The educators who took part in the study admitted that they did not have a comprehensive understanding of the needs of these students. They explained that the needs of 2e students vary from one individual to another. The approach used to handle one 2e student cannot be effective when handling another student with the same condition. The level of sensitivity to various forces in the classroom of these students also varies. The only way is to treat each learner as uniquely as possible to effectively meet their needs.

One of the professors explained that he has a challenge in regulating his tone to suit 2e students. He noted that sometimes when defining a concept, he would notice a 2e student reacting in a way that shows discomfort.

Theme 3: Institutional Failures

When analyzing the primary data obtained from educators, one of the prominent themes that emerged is institutional failures. The educators feel that institutions of higher learning have failed to understand the unique needs of 2e students. Colleges have made impressive steps toward meeting the unique needs of the deaf, the blind, and those who are physically handicapped. However, the same has not happened in addressing the needs of 2e learners. They explained that in their institutions, there are no formal structures that are specifically meant to address the needs of these students. The institution has not made an effort to introduce special training that can help these learners.

Kirp (2019) blames this failure on the fact that this condition is rarely understood. These students are considered gifted, and as such, the need to give them exceptional support is seldom visible. Unless their plight is clearly articulated and special needs fully understood, most of these challenges will remain unsolved.

Support for Academic Achievement: Students’ Perspective

The professors who took part in this study felt that it is possible to address the challenges that 2e students face and ensure that their retention and graduation rates are maintained as high as possible. They agreed with the students’ view that most of these challenges are ignored despite the impact that they have on the learners. When attempting to provide a potential solution to these issues, the following key ideas came to light.

Theme 1: Promoting Teacher-Student Relationship

A common theme that emerged during the analysis of primary data from the professors is the need to promote the teacher-student relationship at these institutions. The educators feel that there is a major divide between the teachers and students, making it difficult for the educators to understand the unique challenges of the learners. A significant few students are willing to share their problems with their professors. Some of those who drop out of college never share their challenges with their teachers. It comes as a surprise to educators when they are informed that their students are so stressed that they opt to drop out of school. A close teacher-student relationship can help eliminate such undesirable events. The learner can get the support they need to help eliminate the stress that they have.

Theme 2: Understanding 2e Challenges

Findings also reveal that there is a need for educators to understand the unique challenges of 2e students. One of the professors admitted that it is easier to focus on their unique skills than the challenges that they face. Nyberg and Manzone (2022) argue that some educators believe that when they focus on the giftedness of these students, they will feel motivated and will easily overcome the unique challenges that they face. However, the reality that the findings show is that these learners can only achieve true success if their unique weaknesses are addressed instead of being ignored.

Theme 3: Sharing Responsibilities

The participants of this study felt that there is a need for educators to work closely with one another to assist these students. They explained that sharing responsibilities may help them to offer the best services to these learners. There are cases where one educator may feel overwhelmed when handling a specific student. As mentioned above, sometimes 2e students may be upset by a simple thing such as the tone of voice of a teacher.

Close collaboration with teachers in higher learning institutions can help manage such problems. For instance, once they are identified, such students should be offered the opportunity to choose a class they wish to attend if the course is provided by several professors. The strategy will ensure that the educators do not feel imprisoned by the need to use a certain voice to communicate with the students. The strategy will benefit not only the educators but also the students.

Theme 4: Developing the Right Policies

The findings of this study show that some of the major challenges that 2e students face are caused by the fact that most of these institutions of higher learning do not understand their problem. As the awareness about the challenges of these students continues to spread, institutions of higher learning need to act appropriately. Policy development should be the first approach that institutions need to embrace. The unique challenges of these students should be articulated, and appropriate solutions should be outlined.

As professors work on ways to individually assist these learners, there should be clear policies addressing how their problems can be addressed. These policies should outline the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders and the resources that should be made available to them. There should be systems and structures that these learners can rely on when they face a unique challenge that threatens their stay in school.

Theme 5: Parental Involvement

The participants also felt that parental involvement is needed when addressing these students’ challenges. Parents often understand the unique needs of their children from a young age. The problem is that these parents expect teachers to understand these challenges as well, even if they are not informed about them. These assumptions tend to hurt these students because, in the end, teachers cannot attend to the students effectively.

When parents are involved, they will explain to the teachers the fears and weaknesses of the learners. Teachers can also share the performance and progress that these students have made over a given period. The close coordination of these different stakeholders will ensure that these students get the best assistance they can get.

Theme 6: Availing Resources to 2e Students

The interviewed professors reaffirmed the need to avail themselves of the resources needed to handle special needs students. They explained that students themselves should be offered resources, both in the classroom and in the library, which can enable them to conduct private studies. The educators also need to be given resources relevant when handling these students. For instance, they may need to have relevant literature explaining these students’ unique conditions and how they can be assisted.

Theme 7: Professional Development of Teachers

Findings from primary data sources show that there is a need for the professional development of educators. Teachers who handle the deaf or the blind are taken through some form of training to enable them to cope with the unique needs of their students (Snyder et al., 2022). Unfortunately, those who handle 2e students are not given any specialized training that helps them understand their needs.

The professors who took part in the data collection explained that institutions of higher learning should understand that 2e students are as unique in their needs as learners with other disabilities. As such, these educators should be trained on how to manage their emotional instability and hypersensitive nature. They need to understand that sometimes, these students can be affected when they speak in a given manner. Such an empowered teacher will not be puzzled and annoyed by the student’s reaction. Instead, they will know how they reacted in a given way and offer the needed assistance.

Theme 8: Improving Standards and Procedures

There is also the need to improve the classroom standards and procedures when handling these students. Lopez and Olan (2019) explain that the challenge educators face is that 2e students constitute a significantly small portion of the entire population of learners. As such, there cannot be a radical change in the pedagogy used.

However, a system can be created that allows these special needs students to seek help whenever needed. The standards should be set in line with the needs and capabilities of all learners. A procedure should then be developed to allow these learners to understand concepts taught in class. They should also have the means to contact their professors when they need additional assistance after classes. They should also be offered an environment where they can easily form study groups with their peers to discuss classwork and other social issues that would make them remain focused and committed to completing their studies.

References

Armstrong, S. (2018). A qualitative study of the experiences that facilitated academic and social success for twice-exceptional students transitioning into higher education [Doctoral dissertation, California Lutheran University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

Baum, S., Schader, R., & Owen, S. (2021). To be gifted and learning disabled: Strength-based strategies for helping twice-exceptional students with LD, ADHD, ASD, and more (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.

Cain, M. K., Kaboski, J. R., & Gilger, J. W. (2019). Profiles and academic trajectories of cognitively gifted children with autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 23(7), 1663-1674. Web.

Choi, J. H., Meisenheimer, J. M., McCart, A. B., & Sailor, W. (2017). Improving learning for all students through equity-based inclusive reform practices: Effectiveness of a fully integrated schoolwide model on student reading and math achievement. Remedial and Special Education, 38(1), 28–41. Web.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.

Conejeros-Solar, M. L., Gómez-Arizaga, M. P., Schader, R. M., Baum, S. M., Sandoval-Rodríguez, K., & Henríquez, S. C. (2021). The other side of the coin: Perceptions of twice-exceptional students by their close friends. SAGE Open, 11(2), 1-11. Web.

Fullan, M. (2010). All systems go: The change imperative for whole system reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Public L. No. 101-476, Stat. 1142 (2004).

Gelbar, N. W., Cascio, A. A., Madaus, J. W., & Reis, S. M. (2021). A systematic review of the research on gifted individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Gifted Child Quarterly, 1-9. Web.

Gilman, B. (2020). Academic advocacy for gifted children. Gifted Unlimited.

Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-606. Web.

Hulsey, D., Moten, R., Hebda, M., Sulak, N., & Bagby, J. (2022). Using behavioral engagement measures of multiple learning profiles to recognize twice-exceptional students. Gifted Child Today, 46(1), 13-24. Web.

Josephson, J., Wolfgang, C., & Mehrenberg, R. (2018). Strategies for supporting students who are twice-exceptional. Journal of Special Education Apprenticeship, 7(2), 5-16. Web.

Kaufman, S. B. (2018). Introduction. In S. B. Kaufman (Ed.), Twice exceptional: Supporting and educating bright and creative students with learning difficulties (pp. 1-18). OUP.

Kirp, D. (2019). The college dropout scandal. Oxford University Press.

Kozleski, E. B., & Choi, J. H. (2018). Leadership for equity and inclusivity in schools: The cultural work of inclusive schools. Inclusion, 6(1). Web.

Kurth, A. J., & Forber-Pratt, A. (2017). Views of inclusive education from the perspectives of pre-service and mentor teachers. Inclusion, 5(3), 189-202.

Lee, C. W., & Ritchotte, J. A. (2017). Seeing and supporting twice-exceptional learners. The Educational Forum, 82(1), 68-84. Web.

Lopez, A., & Olan, L. (2019). Transformative pedagogies for teacher education: Critical action agency and dialogue in teaching and learning contexts. Information Age Publishing.

Lynch, J., M. (2017). Effective instruction for students with disabilities: Perceptions of rural Middle school principals. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 35(4), 18-28.

McClurg, M., Wu, J., & McCallum, S. (2021). Academic success of general education college students compared to those screened as twice-exceptional and gifted. Innovative Higher Education, 46(1), 411-427. Web.

Musgrove B., M. (2017). Education Policy’s Critical Role in Improving the Futures of Individuals with Disabilities. Inclusion, 5(2), 136-148.

Neilsen, S. (2018). Inside but still on the outside? Teachers’ experiences with the inclusion of pupils with special educational needs in general education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24 (9), 980–996. Web.

Nese, J., Stevens, J., & Schulte, C. (2017). Modeling the time-varying nature of student. Exceptionality Classification on Achievement Growth, 51(1), 38-49.

Nolte, M. (2018). Twice-exceptional students: Students with special needs and a high mathematical potential. In F. M. Singer (Ed.), Mathematical creativity and mathematical giftedness (pp. 199-225). Springer.

Nyberg, J., & Manzone, J. (2022). Creating equitable services for the gifted: protocols for identification implementation and evaluation. IGI Global.

Ottone-Cross, K. L., Gelbar, N. W., Dulong-Langley, S., Root, M. M., Avitia, M. J., Bray, M. A., Courville, T., & Pan, X. (2018). Gifted and learning-disabled: A study of strengths and weaknesses in higher-order processing. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology, 7(sup1), 173-181. Web.

Ovortrup, A., & Ovortrup, L.(2017). Inclusion: Dimensions of inclusion in education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 20 (4), 803–817.

Reis, M., Madaus, J., Gelbar, N., & Miller, J. (2022). Strength-based strategies for twice-exceptional high school students with autism spectrum disorder. Teaching Exceptional Children, 4(1), 1-9. Web.

Snyder, K. H., McClurg, V. M., Wu, J., & McCallum, R. S. (2020). Success of students screened as twice-exceptional as a function of major selection and academic strength. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 1-26. Web.

Srivastava, M., De Boer, A. A., & Pijl, S. (2017). Preparing for the inclusive classroom: Changing teachers’ attitudes and knowledge. Teacher Development, 21(4), 561-579. Web.

Taub, D., McCord, J., & Ryndak, D. (2017). Opportunities to learn for students with extensive support needs: A context of research-supported practices for all in general education classes. Journal of Special Education, 51(3), 127-137.

Thompson, C., Falkmer, T., Evans, K., Bölte, S., & Girdler, S. (2018). A realist evaluation of peer mentoring support for university students with autism. British Journal of Special Education, 45(4), 412-434. Web.

Villanueva, S. A., & Huber, T. (2019). The issues in identifying twice exceptional students: A review of the literature. International Journal of Development Research, 9(9), 30101-30112.

Appendix

Interview Questions for Students

1. Where are you from originally?
2. How long have you been at this university and what is your area of study?
3. What have you enjoyed most about the university so far?
4. How does your disability affect your ability to learn in college?
5. How do the services pertaining to your disability that you receive here differ from what you received in high school?
6. What extra of support if any, did you receive in your first two years of college?
7. Do you receive support in and out of the classroom?
8. What sort of teaching methods do think would help you during you four years of college and what resources do you currently have to assist you during instruction?
9. What do you find challenging when learning in an inclusion college classroom and are you able to articulate your learning disability?
10. How would you describe the types of assistance you perceive you need to assist you in increasing your learning and to prepare you for graduation?
11. What else would you like to share concerning your experiences in pursuing a higher education degree?

Interview Questions for Professors

1. How many years have you employed by this university?
2. Can you describe how long you have been teaching 2e students and how much experience you have?
3. What are some ways to encourage each 2E student to see and use his or her strengths, academically and socially?
4. What strategies do you use with 2e students to help them prioritize, set realistic goals, and come up with plans on how to achieve those goals?
5. What is your opinion of the professional development support offered by the university for students with giftedness and ASD?
6. How confident and knowledgeable are you about teaching 2estudents in the same setting as non-disabled students?
7. How do you perceive the potential for 2e students’ success with learning differences?
8. Describe the relationship between the universities professional development support and faculty’s reported comfort level in teaching 2e students?
9. Is there a relationship between institutional support, attitudinal favorability, and demographic factors that affect 2e students’ prior knowledge?
10. In addition to teaching 2e students in higher education, what else can you share?