Gifted Child Quarterly 2015, Vol. 59(2) 108–123 © 2015 National Association for Gifted Children Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0016986215569275 gcq.sagepub.com Article Whoa. Slow down. Why can’t we have an IEP? The school basically said, “He’s not failing. He’s in advanced classes. He’s gifted. He doesn’t need anything. Sorry, we know what you are asking for, but no dice around here.” And, I said, “Fine, he’s in advanced classes. Take him out of advanced classes because he’s making C’s in those. So, take him out of that advanced math so he can be making A’s which he deserves to be making.” They all looked at me and said, “Oh, he’ll be so bored.” And, I said, “Yes, I know, and his behavior will be even worse than it is now.” —Barbara, Individual Interview (July 24, 2012) For over two decades, researchers have established that a child can be both gifted and have a disability (Baum, 1990; Brody & Mills, 1997; Fugate, Zentall, & Gentry, 2013; Neumeister, Yssel, & Burney, 2013). Commonly referred to as twice exceptional, these students possess unique learning and social–emotional characteristics that often result in uneven academic performance and heightened frustration. Baum (1990) classified twice-exceptional students into one of three categories: (a) those identified as gifted but whose learning disability is not identified, (b) those who have an identified disability but whose giftedness is unrecognized, and (c) those whose giftedness and disability mask each other. According to Besnoy (2006), “Regardless of the cate- gory, each twice-exceptional student has distinguishing char- acteristics that must be addressed by teachers, parents, and school administrators” (p. 8). Unfortunately, the multifac- eted characteristics and varying needs of each twice-excep- tional child prevents implementing uniform instructional approaches across the entire population. Previous research documenting the best practices for meeting a twice-exceptional child’s range of needs has high- lighted the critical role of collaboration among all stakehold- ers (i.e., students, parents, teachers, and administrators; Duquette, Fullerton, Orders, & Robertson-Grewal, 2011; Duquette, Orders, Fullerton, & Robertson-Grewal, 2011; Neumeister et al., 2013). Only after school officials, parents, and students have established a collaborative relationship can an individualized curricular program be implemented. The same researchers also described the difficulty in 569275GCQ XX X 10.1177/0016986215569275Gifted Child QuarterlyBesnoy et al. -article 2015 1 University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA Corresponding Author: Kevin D. Besnoy, Department of Special Education and Multiple Abilities Program, University of Alabama, Box 870232, 902 University Boulevard, Graves Hall 210, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0232, USA. Email: kdbesnoy@bamaed.ua.edu The Advocacy Experiences of Parents of Elementary Age, Twice-Exceptional Children Kevin D. Besnoy 1 , Nicole C. Swoszowski 1 , Jane L. Newman 1 , Amanda Floyd 1 , Parrish Jones 1 , and Caitlin Byrne 1 Abstract For many parents, successfully advocating for their twice-exceptional child can be intimidating and overwhelming. Using grounded theory, we conducted a study with parents (n = 8) of elementary age, twice-exceptional children to learn about their advocacy experiences. Findings revealed that parents simultaneously advocated for their child’s disability and protected their child’s giftedness. This overarching theme influenced parents’ expectations of their local school system, while highlighting their lack of professional knowledge. All participants wanted their child to maximize her or his potential and not be limited by her or his disability. Data gathered from individual interviews and focus group sessions revealed that all parents struggled with developing advocacy strategies to manage their child’s dual diagnosis. Only after parents acquired professional knowledge about educational terminology and official policies, were they able to become successful advocates. The lack of readily available resources focusing on twice-exceptional children was an obstacle to successful advocacy. Suggestions for future research and collaboration are discussed. Keywords twice exceptional, special populations/underserved gifted, special populations/underserved gifted, parents