Is Giftedness a Form of Neurodivergence?
It is a question generating considerable discussion among educators, researchers, psychologists and families. While perspectives differ, the conversation invites us to consider something far more important than how we categorise learners: How well do we understand the children in our care, and are we creating the conditions in which their potential can be realised?
As educators, we recognise that no two students learn, think or experience the world in precisely the same way. Yet, when we encounter students with exceptional reasoning abilities, advanced thinking, intense curiosity or an extraordinary capacity for learning, we can easily overlook the complexity of their educational, social and emotional needs.
Giftedness is not simply about being academically successful, achieving high marks or being the first to finish a task. For some students, it can shape how they process information, experience relationships, respond to their environment and make sense of the world around them. Understanding these differences matters, not because every student requires a label, but because every student deserves to be understood.
Giftedness: More Than Being Smart
One of the most persistent misconceptions surrounding giftedness is that gifted students are simply those who achieve the highest results.
However, high potential, giftedness and high achievement are related but distinct concepts.
Within our approach to High Potential and Gifted Education (HPGE), we draw on the work of internationally recognised researcher Françoys Gagné and his Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT).
Gagné (2004) distinguishes between natural abilities, or gifts, and systematically developed competencies, or talents. Importantly, the transformation of potential into achievement is influenced by developmental processes, personal characteristics, environmental factors and opportunities.
This distinction is significant.
A student may demonstrate exceptional mathematical reasoning yet struggle to complete routine classroom tasks. Another may possess remarkable verbal abilities but experience difficulty organising their thoughts in writing. A student may demonstrate sophisticated understanding of complex concepts while achieving results that do not reflect their underlying capabilities.
Potential does not automatically translate into performance.
Our responsibility as educators is therefore not simply to recognise achievement, but to identify potential and provide the appropriate challenge, support and opportunities necessary for that potential to develop. This is particularly important when considering the relationship between giftedness and neurodiversity.
Understanding Neurodiversity and Neurodivergence
Neurodiversity recognises the natural variation in human cognition, neurological development and ways of processing information.
The concept challenges the assumption that there is only one correct or typical way for the human brain to function.
Neurodivergence is commonly used to describe individuals whose cognitive processing or neurological functioning differs meaningfully from prevailing expectations. The term is not itself a medical diagnosis, nor does it automatically imply disability.
The relationship between giftedness and neurodivergence, however, remains an area of scholarly discussion.
Some researchers and practitioners argue that giftedness can represent a distinct cognitive and developmental experience, particularly when accompanied by heightened intensity, complex thinking, sensitivity or uneven patterns of development, where a child’s intellectual growth may outpace their social, emotional or physical development.
Others caution that exceptional intellectual ability alone does not necessarily establish a separate neurotype.
A recent review by Mammadov (2026), supported by the Mensa Foundation, highlights the conceptual complexity of this debate and the limitations of drawing definitive conclusions from the current evidence.
This is an important reminder that educational understanding continues to evolve.
Rather than assuming that all gifted learners are neurodivergent, or that none are, we should recognise the considerable variation within gifted populations.
The more meaningful educational question is not whether every gifted student fits a particular definition, but whether we understand their individual learning profile and respond appropriately.
When Advanced Thinking Meets Different Developmental Needs
Consider a student who demonstrates reasoning abilities several years beyond age expectations but struggles with emotional regulation when faced with frustration.
Or a student who can engage in sophisticated discussions about scientific theories but finds repetitive classroom tasks difficult to sustain.
Another student may demonstrate extraordinary creativity and curiosity yet experience challenges with social connection, executive functioning or sensory demands.
These experiences may reflect different developmental pathways, environmental influences or co-occurring conditions. They should not automatically be attributed to giftedness.
A useful concept here is asynchronous development or uneven development. Some gifted students may think and reason well beyond their age, while their emotional, social or physical development remains more typical for their years. The Columbus Group (1991) described giftedness through a developmental lens, emphasising the possibility that advanced cognitive abilities and other aspects of development may not progress at the same rate.
Although not all gifted students experience significant asynchrony, the concept helps explain why advanced intellectual capability should not be confused with advanced development in every area.
A student who thinks like an older learner may still require the emotional support, relationships and developmental understanding appropriate to their age.
Equally, a student who demonstrates sophisticated reasoning should not be denied academic challenge simply because they experience difficulties in other areas.
We must be careful not to allow a student’s strengths to conceal their needs, or their needs to conceal their strengths.
Twice-Exceptional Learners: Seeing the Whole Child
This principle is especially important for students described as twice-exceptional, or 2e.
Twice-exceptional learners demonstrate high potential or giftedness alongside a disability or another condition that affects learning or participation. This may include autism, ADHD, specific learning disorders or other disabilities.
Their educational profiles can be particularly complex.
A student’s advanced reasoning may compensate for difficulties with reading, writing or executive functioning. Conversely, learning difficulties or behavioural challenges may obscure their exceptional capabilities.
Reis, Baum and Burke (2014) emphasise the importance of recognising both the strengths and the challenges of twice-exceptional students rather than allowing one to overshadow the other.
This has significant implications for identification and classroom practice.
When we focus exclusively on academic performance, we risk overlooking students whose potential is masked by disability, disengagement, limited opportunity or other barriers.
Similarly, when we concentrate solely on remediation, we may inadvertently remove the intellectual challenge that motivates and engages these learners.
Twice-exceptional students do not need educators to choose between supporting their disability and extending their giftedness.
They need both.
A strengths-based approach recognises that appropriate adjustments and meaningful academic challenge are complementary, not competing, educational responsibilities.
The Importance of Environment: When Students Do Not Fit the Learning
One of the most compelling considerations in the giftedness and neurodiversity discussion is the relationship between the learner and their environment.
A student may flourish in a classroom where questioning, complexity, creativity and intellectual risk-taking are encouraged, yet appear disengaged or frustrated in an environment where learning is consistently repetitive or insufficiently challenging.
The student has not changed. The learning conditions have.
This does not mean that every instance of disengagement is caused by unmet gifted learning needs. Student engagement is influenced by many factors. However, it does require us to examine the learning environment before making assumptions about motivation, behaviour or capability.
Research by Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius and Worrell (2011) reinforces the importance of opportunity, appropriate instruction, psychosocial development and sustained support in the development of talent.
This understanding is central to effective HPGE provision.
Differentiation is not about giving gifted students more work. It is about providing learning that is appropriately complex, challenging, purposeful and responsive to their readiness.
It may involve reducing repetition of content students have already mastered, flexible grouping, acceleration, deeper inquiry, opportunities to explore concepts in greater depth, or learning alongside peers with similar interests and abilities.
When we adjust the learning environment to respond to student need, we do more than improve academic engagement. We communicate that difference is recognised, valued and supported.
Identification: Looking Beyond What Is Immediately Visible
If giftedness can present differently across individuals, how do we ensure that students with high potential are recognised?
This question is particularly important for students whose abilities may not be immediately evident through classroom achievement alone.
Within our diocesan approach to HPGE, we recognise the importance of multiple sources of evidence to develop a comprehensive understanding of student potential and achievement.
Cognitive ability assessments, including the Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT), provide valuable information about patterns of reasoning and relative cognitive strengths. When considered alongside achievement data, classroom observations, student work samples and teacher professional judgement, these assessments can inform more responsive educational decisions.
No single assessment tells us everything about a learner.
A high cognitive score does not provide a complete picture of giftedness, just as a lower achievement result does not necessarily indicate an absence of potential.
We must also remain attentive to students who may be underrepresented in gifted identification, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, students experiencing educational disadvantage and students with disability.
Equitable identification requires us to look beyond traditional expectations of what a gifted learner looks like.
The goal is not simply to identify more students.
It is to identify potential more accurately, understand learning needs more deeply and respond with greater educational precision.
A Catholic Perspective: Dignity, Difference and Belonging
As Catholic educators, our understanding of giftedness is also grounded in our belief in the inherent dignity and worth of every human person.
Genesis 1:27 reminds us that humanity is created in the image of God.
This belief carries a profound responsibility.
Every child enters our schools with unique gifts, experiences, strengths, vulnerabilities and possibilities. Our role is not to expect students to conform to a single model of learning, but to create communities where their individuality is recognised and their potential can flourish.
In the words of Pope Francis:
“Education is an act of love.”
This understanding challenges us to move beyond a narrow focus on academic outcomes and consider the whole person.
For gifted students, belonging may involve opportunities to connect with intellectual peers, explore complex ideas, exercise agency and experience learning environments that acknowledge both their capabilities and their developmental needs.
For twice-exceptional students, belonging also means knowing that their strengths are not diminished by disability and that their support needs do not limit our expectations of what they can achieve.
A truly inclusive educational community does not require every learner to be the same.
It recognises that equity is achieved not through identical provision, but through appropriately responding to individual need.
Moving the Conversation Forward
So, is giftedness a form of neurodivergence?
The research does not yet provide a universally accepted answer.
For some individuals, giftedness is experienced as a significant difference in how they think, process information and interact with the world. For others, exceptional ability does not necessarily involve the broader characteristics associated with neurodivergence.
Both perspectives deserve consideration.
What matters most for our schools is that we do not allow uncertainty about terminology to become a barrier to understanding or supporting students.
As educators and families, we can continue to ask:
- Are we recognising potential beyond academic achievement?
- Are we providing sufficient challenge for students who learn differently or more rapidly?
- Are we attentive to students whose disabilities or learning difficulties may mask their strengths?
- Are we creating environments where intellectual curiosity, difference and belonging can coexist?
- Are we listening to students about how they experience learning?
These questions should guide our practice, regardless of where the broader debate ultimately settles.
Learn More
Supporting high potential and gifted learners requires a partnership between schools, families and students. If you would like to learn more about High Potential and Gifted Education within Catholic Schools Maitland-Newcastle, including identification, support strategies and enrichment opportunities, visit our High Potential and Gifted Education | Catholic Schools Maitland-Newcastle webpage or speak with your child’s school.
Our Commitment: Every Learner, Every Possibility
As we continue to build inclusive learning communities, understanding and valuing difference is fundamental to ensuring every learner experiences dignity, belonging and the opportunity to flourish.
High Potential and Gifted Education is not about placing students into categories or creating educational privilege.
It is about recognising that students have different learning needs and ensuring that high potential is not overlooked, underestimated or left undeveloped.
It is about understanding that excellence and inclusion are not competing priorities.
It is about creating learning environments where students experience appropriate challenge, meaningful support and a genuine sense of belonging.
Above all, it is about seeing the whole child.
Because the measure of an inclusive education system is not whether every student receives the same learning experience, but whether every student is given the opportunity to realise their potential.
And that is a responsibility we share as educators, families and a Catholic learning community.
References and Further Reading
Columbus Group. (1991). Unpublished transcript of the meeting of the Columbus Group. Columbus, Ohio.
Gagné, F. (2004). Transforming gifts into talents: The DMGT as a developmental theory. High Ability Studies, 15(2), 119–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359813042000314682
Mammadov, S. (2026). Is giftedness a form of neurodiversity? Department of Educational Psychology, University of Georgia. Supported by the Mensa Foundation.
Olszewski-Kubilius, P., Steenbergen-Hu, S., Calvert, E., Richert Corwith, S., & Bright, A. (2026). A meta-analysis of research on the relationship between overexcitabilities and giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 70(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862251370377
Reis, S. M., Baum, S. M., & Burke, E. (2014). An operational definition of twice-exceptional learners: Implications and applications. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58(3), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986214534976
Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12(1), 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100611418056
Tetreault, N. A. (2021). Insight into a bright mind: A neuroscientist’s personal stories of unique thinking. SCB Distributors.
