Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy Acceleration - negative effects

Slightly off topic...is acceleration better in the younger years? I imagine it being a bigger leap from grade 5 to 7, rather than grade 1 to 3. Or does it make little difference?

That's a bit of a red herring, though. I suspect most of us with accelerated kids would not have picked acceleration as the least worst choice if there were meaningful opportunities for higher level learning at school while retaining the same grade designation.

For instance, if we were in a school district to the west of town, rather than to the east of town, my angst would be over whether DD should elect to take Algebra I or pre-Algebra as a sixth grader, neither of which would technically constitute a subject acceleration in that district, not whether she should attempt a subject acceleration in order to be eligible for placement into pre-Algebra, which is only offered as a seventh grade course in our district. If she were in a specific one of the private schools, she'd technically be enrolled as a fifth grader (and would likely have the leeway to be enrolled as a fourth grader, due to summer birthday) while taking the same classes she's in now.

Some kids bloom where they're planted, and will be fine, accelerated or otherwise accommodated or not. Some kids are less tolerant of mismatch. Some kids will crash and burn even in the absence of apparent academic mismatch. My own personal guess, supported only by anecdote, is that temperament is as large a factor as level of giftedness.

I have been asking for extension work for my son since he started- I even asked if he could bring in his own maths book. He was not allowed. I feel grade skipping is the only option in a school where teaching two different year levels in one class is impossibly hard.

I fear skipping will remain the solution of choice for schools because it creates the least burden on the school economically.

If I had one wish for schools, it would be that subjects be scheduled across levels at the same time. Public schools have the economies of scale to make this happen successfully from the earliest years. It boggles my mind that age is still the criterion against which "ability" is sorted. I believe our current system does a disservice to all children by not addressing individual ability across subjects adequately, whether NT or GT.

I agree, aquinas. When I was younger, my family moved to a different state. At my new school, they gave me an assessment and put me in the appropriate grade (a year above than my previous school). When I went back to my old state, they put me back down to my age-appropriate grade! Ruined me for school.

Middle school, it's hard socially (just as moving is).


High school is hard BOTH socially and also in that you need all of those years for college prep/planning-- the timeline runs from late 9th through to spring of 12th in terms of the things that need to happen if you're planning to apply to any elite colleges.

So no, it's not that socially or academically it's necessarily better at the elementary level, but that there are good pragmatic reasons why it's hard in high school.


DD skipped K through 2, effectively, by being homeschooled for kindy.

She then accelerated by compacting 4th-5th in a single year, though we didn't finish formalizing this arrangement until she was in 9th grade, at which point she moved from 9th to 11th (skipped 10th) at the conclusion of that academic year. If you plan to skip a child older than elementary, you need at least 6-8 months to make sure that all of your i's are dotted and t's are crossed for extracurriculars, for sports, etc. etc.

Early acceleration is easy because the material is so easy at that level, and much of it will be repeated later.

Yeah-- I'd think a skip-skip is easiest in K-3. On the other hand, given what a last-resort it is, and given that administrators are often viewing a skip that way as well, in some respects, the best way to approach a skip is to compact rather than to 'skip.'

That is, have a child do 2y in a single school year by being placed in a split classroom in the younger grade, and at the end of that year, move with the older cohort.

Minimizes academic gaps, minimizes social displacement, and is much more 'natural' feeling to both child and peers.

Content-wise, K-4 all seems mostly osmotic stuff, but later there is much more room for real knowledge gaps. I'm glad DS is skipping 2nd largely because full gifted starts in 3rd. Speeding up entry towards middle school is also cool, because you are more likely to encounter teachers who are subject matter specialists there.

Our DD skipped K (well the extra year of K she was supposed to do, due to her birthdate and our state's weird system she was supposed to do 18 months of K and did only 6). The issue I struggle with 18 months later is feeling that a second skip is already needed, though not yet DESPERATELY needed, and I do tend to believe she'd be better off skipping earlier rather than later. BUT I really don't want to do that second skip if it can possibly be avoided. Currently we are about to start partial homeschool to "avoid" it, which of course is likely to guarantee the necessity later... We will be pushing hard for her to be in split classes for 3/4, 4/5 over the next two years, so that she can skip via compaction if we really think another can't be avoided. In my fantasy land being continually placed in the lower grade of a composite might tide her over until we can move her to a more academic environment when she is a little older. And will also provide access to a wider age group of peers.