IMO if they weren't going to be in Geometry by 8th grade I'm not sure how gifted they really are.
Some may say this conflates
giftedness with
opportunity. Possibly the example of Geometry by 8th grade is predicated on a student placed at grade-level with chronological age peers, then subject accelerated in math, therefore taking Geometry at age 13-14 (if red-shirted, age 14-15).
Two things to the top quote, that by a quick scan I can't figure out who said.
This depends on what material the 'Geometry' includes. It's arbitrary to say they aren't gifted if they can't at least take Geometry. The Geometry class as you took it in H.S. a generation ago, the Geometry class my son took in 8th grade, the new Common Core 'aligned' geometry class. I keep saying this like a broken record, but Common Core redefines what curriculum is in "geometry", and what is in Algebra I, and what 8th grade math looks like.
And if you look back in history, you can't say that kids 30 years ago weren't gifted because they weren't in Geometry in 8th, when it often wasn't available. Giftedness is not defined by by knowing certain material by a certain age. Just because my kid read at 3, doesn't mean that ALL gifted kids read by 3, or that those who don't aren't gifted in the language arts.
