Skip to main content

Academic Success of General Education College Students Compared to those Screened as Twice-Exceptional and Gifted

Abstract

In this study, the high school and college GPAs of college students who were screened as twice-exceptional were compared to college students screened as gifted and average college students. From a sample of 32,741 college students, those screened as gifted earned significantly higher means than students screened as twice-exceptional (2e) and the general college population on both high school and college GPA (p < .05); students screened as 2e earned high school and college GPA means higher than those from the general college population (p < .05). No mean college GPA differences were found between students screened as 2e with STEM majors and those with non-STEM majors GPA (p > .05), but STEM majors had higher high school mean GPAs than those with non-STEM majors (p < .001). Additionally, 2e students screened as having a reading learning disability (LD) yielded higher mean high school and college GPAs than 2e students screened as having a math LD (p < .001). Implications for advising are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. ACT. (2004). What works in student retention—four-year public institutions. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED515398.pdf

  2. ACT. (2019). National distributions of cumulative percents for ACT test scores: ACT-tested high school graduates form 2015, 2016 and 2017. http://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/MultipleChoiceStemComposite2017-18.pdf

  3. Adams, C. M., Yssel, N., & Anwiler, H. (2013). Twice-exceptional learners and RtI: Targeting both sides of the same coin. In M. R. Coleman & S. K. Johnsen (Eds.), Implementing RtI with gifted students: Service models, trends and issues (pp. 229–252). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Akar, S. S., & Akar, I. (2020). Academically gifted and albino: A narrative study of a twice-exceptional. International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(2), 279–296. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2020.241.19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Amran, H. A., & Majid, R. A. (2019). Learning strategies for twice-exceptional students. International Journal of Special Education, 33(4), 954–976.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Assouline, S. G., Foley-Nicpon, M., Huber, D. H. (2006). The impact of vulnerabilities and strengths of twice-exceptional students: A message to school counselors. Professional School Counseling, 10(1), 14–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Baldwin, L., Omdal, S. N., & Pereles, D. (2015). Beyond stereotypes: Understanding, recognizing, and working with twice-exceptional learners. Teaching Exceptional Children, 47(4), 216–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059915569361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Banard-Brak, L., Johnsen, S. A., Pond Hannig, A., & Wei, T. (2015). The incidence of potentially gifted students within a special education population. Roeper Review, 37(2), 74–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2015.1008661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bell, S. M., Taylor, E. P., McCallum, R. S., Coles, J. T., & Hays, E. (2015). Comparing prospective twice-exceptional students with high-performing peers on high-stakes tests of achievement. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 38, 294–317. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353215592500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 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), 1663–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361318804019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen, X. (2013). STEM attrition: College students’ paths into and out of STEM fields (NCES 201four001). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Educational Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

  12. College Board. (2015). SAT subject tests percentile ranks. https://secure-media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/sat/sat-percentile-ranks-subject-tests-2015.pdf

  13. DeBerard, M. S., Spielmans, G. I., & Julka, D. L. (2004). Predictors of academic achievement and retention among college freshmen: A longitudinal study. College Student Journal, 38, 66–80.

  14. Diverse Issues in Higher Education. (2020). Dozens of colleges have nixed SAT/ACT for fall 2021 admission since the coronavirus spread. https://diverseeducation.com/article/173207/

  15. D’Souza, S. L. (2014). Academically gifted university students with learning disabilities: A qualitative exploration of the experiences and perceptions of twice exceptional university students (Doctoral Dissertations). University of Connecticut.

  16. Foley Nicpon, M., Allmon, A., Sieck, B., & Stinson, R.D. (2011). Empirical investigation of twice-exceptionality: Where have we been and where are we going? Gifted Child Quarterly, 55, 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986210382575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Foley-Nicpon, M., Assouline, S. G., & Fosenburg, S. (2015). The relationship between self-concept, ability, and academic programming among twice-exceptional youth. Journal of Advanced Academics, 26(4), 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X15603364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Franklin-Rohr, C. (2012). Opportunities for 2X students to shine in STEM. Understanding our Gifted, 25(1), 31–32.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Geiser, S. (2017). Norm-references tests and race-blind admissions: The case for eliminating the SAT and ACT at the University of California. Center for Studies in Higher Education. https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED580807

  20. Geiser, S., & Santelices, M. V. (2007). Validity of high-school grades in predicting student success beyond the freshman year: High-school record vs. standardized tests as indicators of four-year college outcomes. Research & Occasional Paper Series: CSHE. 6.07. Center for Studies in Higher Education.

  21. Graunke, S. S., & Woosley, S. A. (2005). An exploration of the factors that affect the academic success of college sophomores. College Student Journal, 39, 367–376.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Greene, J. P., & Winters, M. A. (2005). Public high school graduation and college-readiness rates: 1991–2002. Education Working Paper No. 8. Center for Civic Innovation.

  23. Gregg, N. (2007). Underserved and unprepared: Postsecondary learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 22, 219–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2007.00250.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hays, E.A. (2016). Academic outcomes in higher education for students screened as twice-exceptional: Gifted with a learning disability in math or reading (doctoral dissertation). University of Tennessee.

  25. Hays, E., McCallum, S. R., & Bell, S. M. (2017). Academic outcomes in higher education for students screened as twice-exceptional: Gifted with a learning disability in math or reading. The School Psychologist, 71(3), 58-70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353215592500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hertzog, N. B., & Chung, R. U. (2015). Outcomes for students on a fast track to college: Early college entrance program at University of Washington. Roeper Review, 37(1), 38–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2014.976324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hoffman, J.L., & Lowitzki, K.E. (2005). Predicting with high school grades and test scores: Limitations for minority students. The Review of Higher Education, 28, 455–474. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2005.0042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Holland, J. L. (1985). Vocational preference inventory. Consulting Psychologists Press.

  29. Hu, X., & Ortagus, J. C. (2019). A national study of the influence of the community college pathway on female students’ STEM baccalaureate success. Community College Review, 47(3), 242–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552119850321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act Amendments, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).

  31. Kalbfleish, M. L. (2013). Twice-exceptional students: Gifted students with learning disabilities. In C. M. Callahan & H. L. Herberg-Davis’s (Eds.) Fundamentals of gifted education: Considering multiple perspectives. Routledge.

  32. Lee, I. H., Rojewski, J. W., Gregg, N. & Jeong, S. O. (2015). Postsecondary education persistence of adolescents with specific learning disabilities or emotional/behavioral disorders. The Journal of Special Education, 49, 77-88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466914524826

  33. Lopez, C. & Jones, S. J. (2016). Examination of factors that predict academic adjustment and success of community college transfer students in STEM at 4-year institutions, Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 41(3), 168–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2016.1168328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lounsbury, J. W., Fisher, L. A., Levy, J. J., & Welsh, D. P. (2009). An investigation of character strengths in relation to the academic success of college students. Individual Differences Research, 7(1), 52–69.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Maddocks, D. L. S. (2018). The identification of students who are gifted and have a learning disability: A comparison of different diagnostic criteria. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62, 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217752096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Maddocks, D. L. S. (2020). Cognitive and achievement characteristics of students from a national sample identified as potentially twice exceptional (gifted with a learning disability). Gifted Child Quarterly, 64(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986219886668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Marquette, C., Cannings, K., & Mahseredjian, S. (2002). How do young people choose college majors? Economics of Education Review, 21, 543–556. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7757(01)00054-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Mayes, R. D., & Moore, J. L. (2016). Adversity and pitfalls of twice-exceptional urban learners. Journal of Advanced Academics, 27(3), 167–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X16649930

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. McCallum, R. S., Bell, S. M., Coles, J. T., Miller, K. C., Hopkins, M. B., & Hilton-Prillhart, A. (2013). A model for screening twice-exceptional students (gifted with learning disabilities) within a response to intervention paradigm. Gifted Child Quarterly, 57, 209–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986213500070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. McClurg, V. M., McCallum, R. S., Hassett, N., & Bell, S. M. (2020). CBM and screening for dyslexia: Does the typical CBM screening process identify students with dyslexia? [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling, University of Tennessee.

  41. McKim, A. J., Sorensen, T. J., Velez, J. J., Field, K. G., Crannell, W. K., Curtis, L. R., Diebel, P. L., Stone, D. L. & Gaebel, K. (2017). Underrepresented minority students find balance in STEM: Implications for colleges and teachers of agriculture. NACTA Journal, 61(4), 317–323.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Mullet, D. R., & Rinn, A. N. (2015). Giftedness and ADHD: Identification, misdiagnosis, and dual diagnosis. Roeper Review, 37, 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2015.1077910

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. National Center for Education Statistics (n.d.). Students with disabilities. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=60

  44. National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2019). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2019. National Science Foundation. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf19304/digest/about-this-report

  45. National Science Foundation. (2010). Scientists and engineers statistical data system. https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/sestat/

  46. Ottone-Cross, K. L., Gelbar, N. W., Dulong-Langley, S., Root, M. M., Avitia, M. J., Bray, M. A., Courville, T., & Pan, X. (2019). Gifted and learning-disabled: A study of strengths and weaknesses in higher-order processing. International Journal of School & Education Psychology, 7(1), 173–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2018.1509034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Packard, B. W., Gagnon, J. L., LaBelle, O., Jeffers, K., & Lynn, E. (2011). Women’s experience in the STEM community college transfer pathway. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 17(2), 129–147. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2011002470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Reis, S. M., & Colbert, R. (2004). Counseling needs of academically talented students with learning disabilities. Professional School Counseling, 8, 156–167.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Reis, S. M., Neu, T. W., & McGuire, J. M. (1997). Case studies of high-ability students with learning disabilities who have achieved. Exceptional Children, 63, 463–479. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440299706300403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Reis, S. M., Baum, S. M., & Burke, E. (2014). An operational definition of twice-exceptional learners: Implications and applications. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58, 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986214534976

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Sethna, B. N. Wickstrom, C.D., Boothe, D., & Stanley, J. C. (2001). The advanced academy of Georgia: Four years as a residential early-college-entrance program. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 13, 11–22. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2001-360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Simmons, R. & Smith, K. S. (2020). Success central: Addressing the persistence of African-American and Latinx college students using a peer success coaching intervention. Innovative Higher Education, 45, 419–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-020-09516-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. 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. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025120915852

  54. Soares, J. A. (2020). The scandal of standardized tests: Why we need to drop the SAT and ACT. Teachers College Press.

  55. Stumpf, H., & Stanley, J. C. (2002). Group data on high school grade point averages and scores on academic aptitude tests as predictors of institutional graduation rates. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62, 1042–1052. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164402238091

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Tennessee Department of Education. (n.d.). TN K-12 intellectually gifted assessment scoring grid. https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/education/special-education/eligibility/se_eligibility_intellect_gift_doc.pdf

  57. Trotman Scott, M. F. (2016). About F.A.C.E.: Increasing the identification of African American males with dual exceptionalities. Journal of African American Males in Education, 7(1), 98–117.

    Google Scholar 

  58. U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. (2016). STEM designated degree program list. https://www.ice.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Document/2016/stem-list.pdf

  59. Vigdor, M. & Diaz, J. (2020, May 21). More colleges are waiving SAT and ACT requirements. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/article/sat-act-test-optional-colleges-coronavirus.html

  60. Westrick, P. A., Le, H., Robbins, S. B., Radunzel, J. M. R., & Schmidt, F. L. (2015). College performance and retention: A meta-analysis of the predictive validities of ACT scores, high school grades, and SES. Educational Assessment, 20(1), 23–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2015.997614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Wood, S. C. (2012). Learning disorder diagnosis in high-aptitude postsecondary students (doctoral Dissertation). University of Virginia.

  62. Xu, Y. J. (2018). The experience and persistence of college students in STEM majors. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory, & Practice, 19(4), 413–432. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025116638344

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jiaju Wu.

Ethics declarations

I, Jiaju Wu, will be serving as the corresponding author for this manuscript. All of the authors listed have agree to this listing-order and to the submission of the manuscript in its current form. I have assumed responsibility for keeping my coauthors informed of our progress through the editorial review process, the content of the reviews, and any revisions made. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. This study has not been published in whole or part elsewhere. There is also no financial interest to report.

Conflict of Interest

We have no known conflict of interest to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

McClurg, V.M., Wu, J. & McCallum, R.S. Academic Success of General Education College Students Compared to those Screened as Twice-Exceptional and Gifted. Innov High Educ 46, 411–427 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-021-09543-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • 2e
  • College success
  • STEM