Likewise, while DC has long been described as unusually mature, early on (K-3 grade age), DC actually was described as unusually immature in behavior. Curiously, this was where being young for grade was interpreted generously. One teacher in fifth grade (two years young for grade) commented to me that sometimes immature behaviors were observed, but then she would remind herself that this was expected--and thus not problematic--because of DC's actual age. Which speaks to how critical the adult response to acceleration is. The same behavior could easily have been interpreted by a different teacher as "proof" that acceleration was inappropriate and potentially harmful to social development. In this case, I think our child also picked up some not-wholly-deserved benefit of the doubt, as DC has also consistently ticked many of the boxes for ADHD (formally undiagnosed). (It does help that this placement was the result of a school-initiated simultaneous whole-grade skip with additional SSA, with the backing of the school administrator.)
The perception of a child's maturity is SO vulnerable to the eye of the beholder. And to the impact of the environment. Probably more so the younger the child is.
I have had discussions with both the most senior child psychiatrist in our state and an excellent psychologist, where they started talking about how socially advanced, mature, etc my child was. How inarguable, how obvious for all to see... What a delight to talk to. That there was a terrible risk of forgetting how young they were, that if you were to talk on the phone you would not realise you were not talking to an adult (if it were not for the age appropriate voice).
And we have had to point out how interesting it is that they say that because teachers say "Immature, lacks social skills, lacks independence, unable to function etc" and have questioned the ed psych evaluation. Both times these highly qualified professionals have blinked at us before trying to reply to that.
Miraca Gross's research purports to have shown the positive impact of acceleration AND the negative impact of failure to do so. And also clearly demonstrates that this only works where both school leadership and teachers are supportive. I wonder how much just the genuine support makes a huge difference.
Maybe there are other ways to move a very gifted child through school than acceleration, but ANY successful model will require genuine belief and support from leadership and teachers and across the entire span of those measures being applied. Successful outcomes, maybe more for some kids than others, require a belief that gifted kids exist, that levels of giftedness exist, a propensity to actually LIKE and enjoy those children and an ability to have flexible approaches in a fundamentally inflexible system.
