Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion thoughts on accelerated versus gifted education

The district where I teach has recently moved to an accelerated model. This happened due to budget cuts which resulted in the elimination of gifted teachers. Students identified as gifted learners were receiving daily pull out instruction using resources specifically created for gifted learners. These students now are clustered together in their homeroom and are all receiving instruction in language arts and math one grade higher than their actual grade. They no longer receive pull out instruction.

I was wondering if anyone has had experience with an accelerated model like this?

This is basically the model that my district has used for years for the "highly gifted" students. They used to have pull-out enrichment for the "normally gifted" students and a cluster for the "highly gifted," but they are transitioning now to using the cluster method for all gifted students.

What do you want to know?

Let's see in middle school my older son is clustered into a gifted academy. Not really that accelerated except they all took algebra in 8th grade and that isn't what the majority of the school does...it is more of a differentiation...the teacher for each subject area class teaches the one gifted class they have differently than her/his other classes.

In high school he is going to accelerate math by taking two math classes each year. His school is on a 4x4 block schedule....they take four classes each semester for double time and cover a year in a semester...so he will take geometry one semester and algebra II the next. And the next year do the same thing with pre calc and another math.

His elementary school brother had 2 wonderful gifted endorsed classroom teachers last year who I met with and they just figured out on their own what to do with him. This year he skipped a grade and that pretty much met his needs. Next year they are going to have to figure something out.

I was wondered if parents found one model more appropriate? I feel like the accelerated model, which is one grade level accel. in my school won't necessarily meet the needs of some of our gifted students because it won't be challenging enough.

I don't think it should be a choice of one or the other. Why not have acceleration (not limited to just one year, of course) and also have deeper, more challenging coursework?

And why just for gifted students? Why not teach everyone to their level? Kids at the 65th percentile shouldn't be in the same classroom as kids at the 35th percentile.

Any model that doesn't include certified GT teachers I'd have a very difficult time believing to be appropriate for GT students regardless of the academic content, the social-emotional needs alone mandate those trained in GT education and needs. This is often ignored by school districts and over looked by parents as well.

I agree with the others-- any model that sees this as a valid CHOICE, educationally, is probably raising red flags already with respect to gifted learners.

Really, this is the choice that says:

Would you like to go faster?

OR

Would you like to learn more deeply?

Choose wisely!


I have to wonder at the motivation of such a choice, honestly-- this factory approach seems almost intended to punish those students for whom this question inherently poses a Faustian bargain.

Makes me wonder what on earth the administrators are actually thinking.

Because a common characteristic of gifted learners is that they may require fewer repetitions to grasp a concept, avoiding or minimizing repetition means that material will be covered more quickly.

For some topics, some students may wish to go deeper into details which may typically be covered with students several years/grades older. For other topics, some students may wish to quickly move on. Both of these may be considered forms of acceleration. This Davidson article lists 18 types of acceleration: http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/Articles_id_10313.aspx.

Limiting students to classes which are one year accelerated may be better than nothing, but as others have mentioned, may fall short... far short... of serving the gifted population.