Learning and Motivational Characteristics of Boys With AD/HD and/or Giftedness

This study compared the academic and learning characteristics of students with (a) Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (AD/HD), (b) giftedness, and (c) giftedness with AD/HD, and examines specific a priori questions. The information reported by teachers, parents, and children was analyzed with a multiple-case design with constant comparative procedures within and across groups. The results indicated that giftedness conferred benefits related to specific talents but did not offer protection from the negative outcomes of AD/HD, such as inattention and homework problems. The learning and motivational profiles of each group were discussed in terms of implications for differential diagnosis and research and for teaching children with AD/HD and giftedness in general and special settings. Exceptional Children AD/HD (for review see, Zentall, 1993) and with pure giftedness (Van Tassel-Baska, 1998). To develop a framework for understanding students with these exceptionalities, we used both the optimal stimulation theory (e.g., Berlyne, 1960) and Dabrowski’s Theory of Positive Disintegration (1964). The optimal stimulation theory states that all organisms have a biological need for stimulation, which is homeostatically regulated by the individual through activity. Prior work with students with AD/HD documented that these students were more readily understimulated (i.e., habituated to stimuli faster) than children without AD/HD, especially in familiar school contexts, during the performance of rote, long, or uncolorful tasks, and in settings that involved wait (for review see Zentall, 1975; Zentall & Zentall, 1983). Under such reduced stimulus conditions, they were more likely to generate stimulation through (a) verbal and motor activity, (b) impulsivity (difficulty delaying activity), and (c) attraction to internally-produced (daydreaming) and externally available stimulation (poor sustained attention and selective inattention). When we applied the optimal stimulation theory to students with AD/HD, we suggested that these students might also generate cognitive, social, and emotional (aggression) stimulation (see Meyer & Zentall, 1995; Zentall, 1993, 1995). Preferences for type of stimuli might be an individual factor, but because Dabrowski (1964) theorized that individuals were sensitive to specific stimuli, we considered the possibility that there may be some basis to predict preferences. Although prior research has documented that children with AD/HD rely on kinesthetic and sensory types of stimulation, children with both giftedness and AD/HD might additionally rely on intellectual or creative ways to create stimulation—depending upon their specific talent domain (Gardner, 1983). This study recorded the learning and academic characteristics of nine students with and without AD/HD, giftedness, and combined AD/HD and giftedness, as reported by three different participant sources—teachers, parents, and the children. It was also important to determine with which tasks and in which settings these students differed, because both giftedness and AD/HD are situationand task-specific (i.e., students are not talented or AD/HD in all settings, time periods, or with all tasks). We also wished to determine whether a clear differentiation could be made between AD/HD and giftedness, because children with creative giftedness have been misidentified as AD/HD (Cramond, 1994). In addition to these descriptive comparisons within and across groups, we also examined specific a priori questions related to whether intelligence could be considered a protective factor in AD/HD.