Thanks for the well-though out, and reasoned comment. I appreciate it.

Does Dr. Gross' book not provide somewhat of empirical evidence to the benefits of acceleration based on the LM? After all, this seems to be the only test she cites for these children whom she follows longitudinally.

As far as placement, my DD did place a couple of grade levels above on the Woodcock, but as you say, I do have an advocacy obstacle ahead of me. They're not open to advancement period. We'll probably just changes schools yet again. It's pretty frustrating. We used the LM as back up, but they insist their "project sharing" curriculum is enough.

One comment to something you say regarding mastering grade levels. To me, that sounds like linear progression. I don't mean this in any sort of snide way, but if a kid has a desire to learn algebra (is intrigued by variables and symbols, etc) and is sick and tired of having to do number lines to show addition and subtraction, why hold her back? Can't she go back and learn the number lines later?

Thanks again. I love reading your insight.