The Inclusive education recently introduced in Kazakhstani education system has a goal to be pioneered by 30 percent of mainstream schools by 2022. Due to this reason many teachers, practitioners and researchers are in the dilemma over how to teach students with additional needs such as twice-exceptional students.  The purpose of this qualitative research is to investigate, from the perspectives of various subject teachers, the educational experience of twice-exceptional students with cerebral palsy who are currently studying in a school for gifted and talented.

    This study was based on a case study method of qualitative research. The main participants of the study were twelve teachers with at least five years teaching in a school for gifted and talented who participated in a semi-structured interview, focus group discussion and were observed during their teaching to triangulate the research results. Reviewing relevant empirical research literature and conducting qualitative research, the teachers’ awareness, beliefs and experience with gifted additional needs students such as twice–exceptional students and methods how twice-exceptional students are identified in the classroom were analysed. Furthermore, the research explores the effects of labeling and non-labeling twice-exceptional students on the academic performance followed by examining the inclusive education techniques to accommodate twice-exceptional students. The results of the study revealed that twice exceptionality is a challenge in participating school. The case study research concluded that educational experience of twice exceptional children is based on crucial factors such as teachers using a differentiated teaching approach as an inclusive strategy to accommodate the unique needs of gifted students with cerebral palsy.

The purpose of this qualitative study is to investigate teachers' perspective of twice-exceptional children with the use of gifted program. According to Missett, Azano, Callahan, and Landrum (2016), the participating teacher's low expectations on twice-exceptional students likely drive the choice of deficit-based interventions more than strength-based ones which are indicated in the IEP rather than the gifted program. In that case, twice-exceptional students may demonstrate low performance because of their disabilities. Although twice-exceptional students are following the gifted curriculum, teachers' negative assumptions about twice-exceptional students may impede their academic progress and inhibit their potential.Developing the skills of twice-exceptional students is not considered appropriate when compiling the gifted program in schools for gifted and talented (Omdal, 2015). On that account, gifted children with cerebral palsy are unable to receive gifted instruction. Instead of being educated in inclusive classes, gifted students with cerebral palsy areplaced in special institutions for students with a similar diagnosis. The special educational need of twice-exceptionality was not put into consideration in curriculum and lesson planning including an individual differentiated approach for students in the classroom (Omdal, 2015). Lack of knowledge among teachers and family members leads to non-identification of twice-exceptional students and unreasonably forcing the learners to bear a considerable learning burden. Twice-exceptional students are often underrepresented in schools for gifted and talented due to the tiny percentage of their enrollment in schools for gifted and talented.The aim of this qualitative research is to investigate the educational experience of teachers and their opinion on how their understanding impacts on the use of a gifted program in the context of a case study of a twice-exceptional student. The research examines whether teachers’ opinions about the twice-exceptional students influence the use of instructions or the way of presenting lesson objectives to a twice-exceptional student indicated in the gifted program. It also studies inclusive strategies that enhance the performance of a twice-exceptional student – giftedness and cerebral palsy.

The findings, described in this chapter, uncover the influence of the usage of the gifted curriculum in teaching twice-exceptional students from two basic angles: 1. Teacher practice with twice-exceptional students 2. Teachers’ perceptions of teaching twice-exceptional students. The findings were analyzed according to the four research questions developed for the study: Research questions Main RQ: What are teachers’ perceptions of giftedness and exceptionality intersection and experience of using the gifted curriculum with twice-exceptional students in school for the gifted and talented in southern Kazakhstan? Sub RQ1: What is teachers’ experience on teaching twice-exceptional students and the paradox of twice-exceptionality in the participating school? Sub RQ2: How does the labeling or the non-identification of twice-exceptional students influence their academic performance? Sub RQ3: How does the teacher's opinion about the twice-exceptional students with cerebral palsy influence the choice of inclusive strategies in the classroom?

References American Psychiatric Association Practice Guidelines for the Treatment of Psychiatric Disorders. (2009). doi:10.1176/appi.books.9780890423905.154688 Assouline, S., Nicpon, M., & Huber, D. (2006). The impact of vulnerabilities and strengths on the academic experiences of twice-exceptional students: A message to school counselors. Professional School Counseling, 10(1), 14-24. . Baum, S. (1990). Gifted but learning disabled: A puzzling paradox (ERIC Digest #E479). Reston VA: Council for Exceptional Children. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 321 484) Baum, S., & Owen, S. (1988). Learning disabled students: How are they different? Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 321-326. Beckley, D. (1999). Gifted and learning disabled: Twice exceptional students. Storrs, C.T: University of Connecticut. Bell, C. D., & Roach, P. B. (2001). A new problem for educators: Identification of the non-achieving gifted student. Education, 107(2), 178-18. Bulgren, J., Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. D. (1988). The effectiveness of a concept teaching routine in enhancing the performance of LD students in secondary-level mainstream classes. Learning Disability Quarterly, 11(1), 3-17. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall. Coleman, M. R., Harradine, C, & King, E. W. (2005). Meeting the needs of students who are twice-exceptional. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(1), 5-6 Coleman, M. R. (2005). Academic strategies that work for gifted students with learning disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(1), 28-32. Corker, M., & Davis, J. M. (2000). ‘Disabled children–(Still) invisible under the law. In J. Cooper (ed) Law, Rights and Disability, London: Jessica Kingsley. Corrigan, P. W., & Watson, A. C. (2002). The paradox of self‐stigma and mental illness. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 9(1), 35-53. Eade, S. J., & Merrotsy, P. (2013). Knowing the person brings light to the gifts: A study of a gifted child with cerebral palsy. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 22(1),5-7. Goodley, D. and Lawthom, R. (eds) (2005). Disability and Psychology: Critical Introductions and Reflections. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children's school outcomes through eighth grade. Child development, 72(2), 625-638 Hernández-Torrano, D., & Tursunbayeva, X. (2016). Are teachers biased when nominating students for gifted services? Evidence from Kazakhstan. High Ability Studies, 5, 1– 13.