It's incredibly difficult for her to learn "these ten things." Not so much for her to "use these ten bits of data" forty times in rapid succession, or to explain how they fit into some larger framework. Come at it from the more complicated (for most people) side of things, and she can learn those ten things more rapidly than her peers. Come at it from the simpler side, and you might well conclude that she is developmentally delayed.
In a workplace setting, this is why the level of the work being performed has to be matched to the individual doing the work.
In a sense, the issue isn't whether the task is "complicated" or "simple". Rather, it has to do with your range of tasks on which an individual is effective.
It appears that as you increase the level of "complexity" of a task (for lack of a better word...complexity isn't quite the right word...degree of variability of inputs along with a temporal component?) you lose the ability to deal with the less "complex" tasks effectively. Mostly because, for all intents and purposes, it would drive such a person insane to perform them on an ongoing basis.
Also, such a person will appear developmentally delayed in such a situation.
This is also a good illustration of why what I think we are calling "gifted" end up in poorly matched situations.
