The purpose of this study was to recognize and validate dual exceptionalities and to give voice to an underachieving gifted adolescent with an Attention Deficit Disorder regarding what has worked and not worked for him in traditional school settings. The importance of this study resonates in the voice of a tenth grade, Caucasian male student; a student for whom learning and intellectual challenge is a driving force, but who has been unable to “achieve” in a traditional school setting. This study is vital in that twice exceptional learners are at great risk of underachieving in traditional school settings. In the context of this study, underachievement was viewed as a phenomenon (Schultz, 2002), not a label. It is a verb, not to be confused with the noun. The term should not be used to describe who someone is (underachiever), but rather what someone does (underachieves). Data gathered in this study were analyzed using a constant comparative method of data analysis, which was applied to interviews and classroom observations in an effort to identify categories and themes (Strauss & Corbin, 1994). Data collected from the student interview, classroom observations, document analysis, and adult interviews were triangulated in an effort to uncover patterns and practices that have contributed to or helped to ameliorate the phenomenon of underachievement in a gifted student identified with ADD. Results of this study indicate that schools underachieve their twice exceptional learners (Schultz, 2002) by failing to recognize the asynchronous tension with which these students live; by not creating life-giving relationships with twice exceptional learners that are based on trust and respect; by not implementing classroom practices that are predicated on constructivist learning theory; by denying them access to intellectual peers; and by failing to instill hope.

<p>Parenting stress (PS) is a phenomenon experienced by all parents to varying degrees due to the demands of meeting a child?s needs. This distinct type of stress is caused by an imbalance between the perceived demands of parenting and the perceived coping resources available to parents. The construct of twice-exceptionality (2E) is defined as the co-occurrence of giftedness and disability or possessing both high cognitive abilities and at least 1 of 13 potential disabilities identified under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004. The purpose of this study was to understand how PS is experienced by parents of children who have been identified with 2E. The theoretical perspectives of stress appraisal, coping, and attribution guided this study and provided a framework for understanding the lived experiences of parents and the meaning they ascribe to these experiences. The goals of the study were accomplished through in-depth interviews with 13 participants, an extensive literature review, and reflective journaling. Interview data were analyzed using the phenomenological techniques of epoche, bracketing, horizontalization, and imaginative variation, and several relevant themes and subthemes were developed. High levels of PS described by the parents in this study indicate that further research is indicated for better understanding and serving the significant needs of this population. The social implications of this research include raising awareness of PS and 2E; increasing the potential for positive outcomes for children and families; and addressing misconceptions concerning giftedness, gender bias in the perceptions of parental roles, and the impact of PS on family systems.

<p> High school students in accelerated academic curricula including Advanced Placement (AP) courses and International Baccalaureate (IB) programs are faced with unique challenges associated with their rigorous academic demands, in addition to normative adolescent stressors. Because of the increasing popularity of AP and IB among high-achieving youth and benefits realized by students who successfully manage such curricula, there remains a need to better understand the experiences of stress and coping among this population. The current study used longitudinal and cross-sectional comparisons to (a) investigate the degree to which students in accelerated curricula experience environmental stressors and employ coping strategies to manage academic stressors, and (b) determine which stressors and coping strategies were associated with student success. The longitudinal sample consisted of 184 students from six high schools within three school districts who completed the six-factor Student Rating of Environmental Stressors Scale (StRESS) and 16-factor Coping with Academic Demands Scale (CADS) at Time 1 (grades 9-11) and one year later, at Time 2 (grades 10-12). The cross-sectional sample included 2,379 students (grades 9-12) from 19 high schools within five school districts who also completed the StRESS, CADS, and the Students Life Satisfaction Scale (SLSS); grade point averages (GPAs) were gleaned from school records. Findings indicate that AP and IB students reported more frequent stressors specific to academic requirements over time, while older students (e.g., 11^th and12^th grade) also reported experiencing more frequent stress due to academic and social struggles and financial issues than their younger counterparts. Regarding coping strategies, findings from longitudinal and cross-sectional comparisons suggested students tend to respond to higher stress by increasing their use of maladaptive strategies including reliance on substance use, reduce effort on schoolwork, and deterioration. Predictive analyses indicated that environmental stressors explained 4-7% and 17-23% of the variance in academic achievement and life satisfaction, respectively. High-achieving students' stress due to academic requirements was related to greater academic success, while it did not appear to compromise life satisfaction. Moreover, while stress due to academic and social struggles was predictive of diminished life satisfaction, stress within this domain was not predictive of poorer academic outcomes. Coping strategies used to manage academic demands accounted for 13-20% and 23-32% of the variance in achievement and life satisfaction, respectively. Students who employed time and task management, sleep, and deterioration to cope were more likely to experience higher academic achievement, while those who coped by seeking academic support, skipping school, engaging in social and creative diversions, using substances, reducing effort on schoolwork, and handling problems alone were less likely to be academically successful. Additionally, those who used cognitive reappraisal, turning to family, and social and athletic diversions were more likely to experience high life satisfaction, while those relying on creative diversions, reduce effort on schoolwork, handle problems alone, and deterioration were less likely to have high life satisfaction. Implications of findings for key stakeholders, including schools psychologists, and future directions for research are discussed.</p>