I've been in both special ed and the gifted program and to be honest there's way more overlap between these two than most people think.

Not just in the people in them - though I am definitely not the only person I know who was in both special ed (SpEd) & Gifted and Talented (GT).

But the needs of students often overlap - both of these programs exist because general education (genEd) is not well suited for them.

And if you think SpEd kids have "poor" social skills, you should spend a few minutes in a GT classroom.

Almost all of them were just as awkward as me.

Even the ones that weren't autistic.

GT programs came into existence out of a realization that genEd was not able to properly serve a particular set of students.

Just like SpEd.

In 1972 in the US the Marland Report determined that gifted children, without special accommodations (like a GT program) are *at risk students*

An excerpt:

GT students in genEd "can suffer psychological damage and permanent impairment of their abilities to function well which is equal to or greater than the similar deprivation suffered by any other population with special needs served by the Office of Education."

To clarify, GT programs existed before this, but this was a particularly notable argument.

What are some of the risks that GT students in genEd face?

Social isolation, low self esteem, low motivation for school work, higher rates of anxiety and depression, and poor study skills.

Does... that sound like SpEd kids without accommodations to anyone else?

That is a rhetorical question.

It does.

My point isn't just "these are similar experiences"

I am a part of both groups and am adamant that we need to be allies with one another. The overlap is so prominent.

I often see the academic value of students framed as GT > genEd > SpEd

GT students are not "better" than disabled students.

GT students, in many ways, ARE disabled students.