I think this is the difference between gifted children and their peers--the rate of learning. Highly gifted children will hear something once and then suddenly know it a few months later (this is how it works in my home at least). No formal teaching or repetition is necessary because the child is soaking up their environment. Moderately gifted children might need to hear it a few times, but likewise, will learn very quickly.
Whereas, other parents are doing daily drills to get the same effect with their children. If they waited a few years for their children to develop, learning would be easier for them. This is why some early readers level out in 3rd grade--others catch up to them, and they don't have the fast learning ability to keep ahead. If all the extra work isn't going to be worth it in the end (no real advantage in the future) why not just let the child follow his/her own passions? Why pressure him to develop on a timeline that isn't comfortable.
I think you have over stated things here, I agree somewhat with the 2nd para. But I think assuming that the highly gifted will require less time and repetition than the MG ignores the varying strengths of children at varying levels of giftedness. Memory, working memory in particular, plays a significant role in many kids of learning, but we often tell parents asking about their kids uneven IQ scores that more "average" WMI than their sky high g loaded scores is common for gifted kids and not worry about it, or even that their GAI is a better indicator of their giftedness than their FSIQ. And what about the kid with a particular gift for math but not so much for literacy, are they less HG or PG because learning literacy is not quite like falling off a log?
Not every HG or PG child will be a leaper, it does not necessarily make them less gifted. Though certainly the leapers may have different learning needs and may be easier to ID as gifted (or not if they get bored and disengage).
