Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy Curious Acceleration question

I am curious about something and wonder if you folks might offer some perspective. When considering acceleration, one of the things I've seen online and in some of the area school district documentation is demonstration of being "two years ahead" of peers. Why is it two years?

If child is in 1st grade, and showing strong 3rd grade achievement, then wouldn't you need to accelerate two grades, into 4th? Seems odd that you'd then do one year acceleration. Wouldn't one year solidly ahead be sufficient to consider promotion? Shouldn't the evaluation be for how quickly they learn? Is that just too difficult to assess properly?

It's fairly easy to show that the child is reading & comprehending 2-3 years ahead of grade, but isn't it possible that math, where the rules and methods might not have been exposed/taught yet, might trip up a child doing an above-grade-level assessment?

I guess it confuses me that innate ability and a need for a faster pace doesn't seem to be the primary indicator of acceleration, so it seems to require pre-teaching a high ability learner, which isn't the point, and then they're bored with redundancy yet again.

But maybe when you use the IAS the above is moot, as the scale weighs more factors than just that. I just don't get the reason for the apparent prerequisite.

That is a great question, and one I have also wondered about, even after being told that the reason is to ensure placement near the top of the class into which the child is being accelerated.

This is one of many ways in which homeschooling (and/or afterschooling) may better meet a child's needs for appropriately challenging and supportive curriculum placement and pacing.

Interesting -- so they want to ensure that a 99% scoring child stays that high? Is that for confidence levels or so they can have good grades, high GPA for accolades, etc? I think my mind is stuck at the crossroad between school = learning to understanding/master and school = achieving as high as you can, being the "best." The school district switching to 'standards based grading' (albeit in a matrix that still allows for grade competition) seems to conflict with that.

Tough call- we chose not to accelerate so I don't have personal experience in that regard.
First, second, and maybe third grade (as a long-time, in-class volunteer) seemed pretty easy. The "executive function" demands were minimal.
For fourth grade, it really ramps up, at least here. It's not enough to be smart; you have to fill out the worksheets on time, correctly, turn them in by the deadline, etc. Actually, I think those are important skills.
I would worry that if you skip someone from first to fourth grade:
1) They really might feel odd since physically, and emotionally, a first grader is very different from a fourth grader.
2) They might really struggle with the executive function issues.
Just my two cents.

Oh, please don't get me wrong, I don't think it'd be easy or wise for most kids to accelerate from 1st to 4th (maybe I'm saying it wrong -- I meant completing grade 1, rising into grade 3 in fall as accelerating one year, rising into 4th would be skipping 2), it just doesn't make sense that you need to demonstrate 2 years above level instead of one just to skip one grade. It seems like a high hurdle meant to discourage rather than meet the needs of a child.

I think the big thing is, I know my DD7 (1st grade) has intuitive math skills and has been insanely bored with repetition and the math part of school all year, but she also doesn't wish to "after school" (and I don't push it; she loves to play and is very imaginative and creative -- she'd rather 'play school' with what she knows). So she needs exposure to 3rd grade math, but I read the detailed core standards and feel she knows the 2nd grade math already, and some of 3rd.

That does seem strange to me. Is it in your school district's policy? DS is in a private school and was accelerated after scoring >80% on year end tests (i.e., they gave him the third grade test while he was in second grade, he got something like 85% on it; then they gave him the fourth grade test and he scored about 50%, so they put him in fourth grade for that subject).

Have you considered a single-subject acceleration (SSA)?

I think you (or we?) need more detail re what "two years ahead" means in your school district. It sounds like you're interpreting it to mean being able to pass an end-of-year assessment two grade levels out, but that might not be what is meant at all. I can imagine several different interpretations of "two years ahead". For example, if the documentation is referring specifically to achievement testing, then it might be referencing "grade level equivalent" scores, which isn't the same thing at all as passing an end-of-year upper grade level assessment.

polarbear

I'm meeting with the teacher this week, to evaluate the enrichment that she started offering the past month or so, and to discuss SSA (with grade acceleration in the back of my mind). The school acceleration process is 'in review' due to the implementation of 'more rigorous' common core curriculum (as in, it's a case-by-case basis with no easy-to-find procedure that I can see). Our very experienced K-2 teacher says she's never been asked about acceleration.

We currently do not do year-end tests, with the first normed achievement test offered in 3rd grade. Math placement tests come in 4th grade. I can't see her enduring 2+ more years at this pace. I believe the enrichment is 2nd grade level thinking oriented stuff, outside the curriculum -- neat stuff she loves, but doesn't make up for the in-class math frustration.

ConnectingDots: That's awesome. It has been suggested to me to have her tested with the third graders in second grade, but they don't do the assessment testing until January, results in late March, so I still need a plan for the next year.

That makes sense. I think what I'm finding is it's not easy to find such information and like pulling teeth to figure out who knows it, and I hate being pushy. Procedural info is not online (I was referencing a few nearby districts to get an idea of area policies). The GT teacher doesn't make the decisions, the teacher has never been asked, and all the reading I do here and elsewhere says to go into a meeting with a principal loaded with documentation and supporting data, but I can't even figure out what they will accept as documentation (ie. if they'll wave off outside IQ & achievement testing) without meeting with someone (not sure who!) first. I just wish it were easier. :-) (Don't we all.)