A common theme on the forum is the extent of acceleration that our children require. Last week, on a lark, I looked up my province's curriculum standards for elementary school and was surprised to see that DS2.8 has met most of the grade 1 targets across the board without any direct instruction. DS won't begin school until he is 4 or 5, possibly as a homeschooler, but I'd like to develop a sense of what road I'm in for.

I'm interested to understand what acceleration has looked like for your children across a variety of subjects and ages to gauge the pace of learning I might expect from DS. (I'm asking this with the obvious caveat that abilities and interests are probably quite idiosyncratic to the individual.) Do they accelerate more quickly through early grades? Which subjects tend to require the most subject acceleration, to what extent, and when?

If your children weren't able to accelerate at a pace commensurate with their abilities, I'd also be interested to hear what you think an appropriate pace would have been.

I've made a hypothetical sample of the information I'm looking for, with an 8 year old child as an exemplar:

Age 4-- Math grade 1, English grade 2, science grade 2, etc.
Age 5--Math grade 3, English grade 4, science grade 4, etc.
...
Age 8--Math grade 6, English grade 7, science grade 7, etc.

Many thanks!

Interesting question.


Actual:

Age 3, 4 + 5-- preK (Montessori), grade 1-ish(?)-- unschoooling, eclectic homeschooling Understand that this is the period in which my daughter learned to read-- quite late by this community's standards-- at almost five years old.
Age 6-- grade 3 (uniform placement)
Age 7-- grade 4-5 (acceleration via pacing of two grades into one year)
Age 8-- grade 6 (GT)
Age 9-- grade 7 (GT), math grade 9 (algebra I)
Age 10-- grade 8 (GT), math grade 10 (geometry)
Age 11-- grade 9 (honors/AP track), math algebra II
Age 12-- grade 10
Age 13-- grade 11, beginning dual enrollment and college coursework
Age 14-- grade 12, mostly dual enrollment coursework.

Now, what I think would have been MORE suitable, in terms of what she seems to have needed in her own developmental terms:

Age 5-- reading gr2, math gr2, science gr4, social studies gr4, writing-- on level.
Age 6-- reading gr 8, math gr4, science gr7, social studies gr7, writing gr 1.
Age 7-- reading gr 9 or 10, math gr 5, science gr9, social studies gr9, writing gr 4 or 5.
Age 8-- reading gr 11 or 12, math gr 8, science gr10, social studies gr10, writing gr6 or 7.

Age 9-- reading post-secondary, math gr9, science gr10, social studies gr10, writing gr8

Age 10-- math gr10, science gr11, social studies gr12, writing gr10

Age 11-- math gr11, science post-secondary, social studies post-secondary, writing gr12

Age 12-- fully post-secondary.

Understand that the latter represents an idea of where a snapshot of her ability would have placed her, but if you look at the difference in trajectory from ages 5 to 7, you can see what we opted for in enrolling her in a school rather than homeschooling.

Here is what I think WOULD have happened had we not done that:

age 6-- reading gr12, math gr7, social studies gr10, science gr8, writing K

age 7-- reading post-secondary, math gr9, social studies post-secondary, science gr 11, writing gr1

age 8-- reading post-secondary, math gr11-12, social studies post-secondary, science post-secondary, writing gr2

Do you see the problem?

In reality most kids get no acceleration. Some schools will allow a years acceleration but most don't. Differentiation is what is usually offered but the teacher may or may not get around to it and it may just mean doing twice as much of the same stuff.

These are great replies! Thanks especially squishys and Howler for your detailed responses.

I have a few comments to make on your posts, but I'm going to wait until more people reply first, as I don't want to unduly bias the discussion.

Much, much appreciated!

One remark I have is that my experience with DS is consistent with Howler and squishys' observations that their children advanced quickly in the early years in science. It seems like children who grasp the scientific method and abstract concepts intuitively can accelerate quite quickly to middle school(and above) material in early elementary. I borrow books on science topics in the 9-12 range from the library often and scaffold DS on the language side. He needs more richness than that provided by material targeted at the K/early elementary set.

For DD we did a whole grade acceleration (she skipped most of K and part of first grade)...math and reading were still a bit easy for her but there were many advanced kids in her particular class. Now she just finished third grade and I can see her skipping to 6th grade math but ONLY because I have been working with her a bit at home. She got almost no differentiation in school. For reading the same thing. She could probably skip 4th and 5th grade reading. Writing is a different story and she really struggles for whatever reason (Part of the reason why is that g/t kids do not necessarily have advanced fine motor ability).


DS just finished first grade and the first half of the year he got no differentiation (other than the little I did at home), and the second half of the year we switched schools and his teacher had him doing mainly 4th-5th grade math, but it was not a real "curriculum" and there was a lot of skipping around from grade to grade depending on the topic. Not sure what's going to happen next year. He's at about a 4th grade level for reading, although tests like an average 5th grader. Unfortunately the teachers don't really have appropriate level books in the classrooms and they hesitate a lot giving kids material that they consider too advanced. But it's easier to ability group and/or differentiate for reading than math. Each kid is given a "just right" level based on testing that is probably not accurate.

In terms of appropriate pace, I think they could have moved twice as fast and skipped kindergarten altogether. So they could have done 1st-2nd grade in one year, 3rd-4th in one year, etc. Unfortunately in real life it doesn't work that way although DD is headed to a g/t magnet for 4th grade that apparently does compacting/accelerating of material.


I have no idea what is going on with science. I just let the kids read what they are interested in at home.

A few thoughts on pace of acceleration and it's interaction with age:

In the early years, almost all of reading and mathematics consist of basic skills, with minimal abstract thinking. A child with exceptional memory can acquire these skills very quickly. A child who has exceptional abstract thinking, but -not- exceptional memory might be a little slower to pick these up, but as soon as s/he reaches mastery of the basic skills, s/he will surge forward.

For writing, there are additional factors having to do with fine motor skills.

In what primary/elementary teachers call the content areas (science and social studies), basic skills are minimally relevant, except insofar as they restrict access to written sources of information. Language comprehension, social comprehension, and conceptual grasp of the scientific method are more important.

Oh, and I think we all realize that there is no new math throughout elementary school, beyond the four basic operations (two of which are derived from the others). So once you've mastered those, it is quite easy to blaze through several years of math in a year.

I think that part of the spurts of growth that one sees in gifted children is a function of the switch from basic skills to higher-level reasoning, problem-solving, comprehension, and expression in middle/late-elementary level curricula. There are multiple paths to basic calculation and decoding skills (especially reading), but once you pass that hump, abstract reasoning takes over.

And, BTW, HK, I have a sibling whose actual acceleration profile was very similar to your DD's idealized profile. My mother was concerned about the huge gap in writing skills (translation: zero note-taking in college), but found that my sib's memory and comprehension were such that notes were unnecessary. The other adjustment was that the required English composition class, history/geography, etc. waited until the last term before graduation. Of course, this required a fair amount of flexibility on the part of the university, which happened mainly because there was faculty support.

Hard to pin down the variations between knowledge, gaps, direct teaching, and personal learning for any particular period. So for DS8.5:

math
pre 5 - ->G2
Age 5 - G1-3
Age 6 - G4&5
Age 7 - G6&7
Age 8 - algebra+?

That's functionally self-directed learning with some minor gap fills in school this past year. It is hard to ponder what it would look like with direct at challenge level instruction rather than time split at school between with I-dotting and T-crossing and doing his own thing.

Reading
pre-5 -> G2
5 -> G3
6 -> G4
7 -> G5-6
8 -> G7

Here the instruction is more tight but his placement is advanced but not accelerated as math is.

Science is such an unknown (heh.) Breadth and depth and variety are so many factors, I don't know that you can equate say having a two month astronomy segment in third grade to any particular curriculum or pace. Personal opinion is this would look best with wide sweeps of a variety of topics and deep-diving on demand until topic exhaustion. One day DS is watching random mainstream science videos and the next he spends three hours watching open courseware college biology 101 videos on cells.

A question for all of you with experience in skipping/acceleration - to the extent it has been up to you, how do you find the "correct" challenge level for each subject? Do you look for your DC to be say, at a comfortable "95th percentile" in a grade (or higher, or lower - just throwing out a number)? Also, if the school or curriculum offers a "challenging" version of a course (honors/gifted/advanced), do you consider a "lower" level than you otherwise might?

We may be facing discussions with the school in the near future about such matters and I am truthfully a bit lost. This has been a very interesting thread! Great questions, OP!

My 12 year old was homeschooled for five years and then attended school for two years. We will be homeschooling again next year.

Age 5: Reading grade 2-3, math grade 1, history grade K, science grade 1

Age 6: Reading grade 2-5, math grade 2, history grade 1, science grade 2-3.

Age 7: Reading grade 3-6 (4th grade literature program), math grade 3-4, history grade 2, science grade 4-5.

Age 8: Reading grade 4-7 (6th grade literature program), math grade 5-6, history grade 3-4, middle school science.

Age 9: Reading grade 5-8 (7th grade literature program), prealgebra, history grade 5-6, middle school science.

Age 10: 6th in school, math was Algebra I. Needed grade 8 across the board.

Age 11: 8th in school, math was geometry. Needed grade 9 across the board.

Age 12 (next year's homeschooling plans): English grade 9-10, Math Algebra II, history grade 9-10 output expectations with college level materials, science grade 9-10 output expectations with college level materials for non-majors, foreign language grade 9 (year 1).

For us, accelerations are both to find the appropriate level, pace, and peers. This is more likely to be in the honors/gifted classes. However, we're accelerating DD into high school science, and will be placing her into the "regular" class to find a teacher more appropriate to her needs. We've done this with assurance that this won't lock her out of honors classes in subsequent years where the instruction is a little more even.

To find the right level, Developing Math Talent recommends an acceleration for 75-80% mastery, patch the gaps, and move on. For science acceleration, we did that, but also looked at the ACT science reasoning score to establish that DD had sufficient scientific reasoning skills to show she was ready to move past factoid- and contrived-experiment-driven middle school science. It was enough of an acceleration that I also talked with her gifted/language arts teacher to assess that her behavior, organization, and writing skills were sufficient to function in a high school environment.

Our strategy has been significantly limited by DD's weakest skill set-- her writing.

While not a "2e" issue, exactly, it's been a problem for her because she is functionally PG in every other domain, but as geofizz notes, when you're considering acceleration that is way radical (+3 years or more past agemates) then you also need to consider whether or not the ancillary demands can be met.

In writing, there is no real way that my then-9-yo could have functioned in a non-majors physics course at the collegiate level. The material would have been roughly right (she'd have been at about the 80th percentile in the class cohort, say), but the writing expectations were so much beyond her that there was little hope of making it work. I say that even in light of aeh's anecdote; I doubt very seriously that my DD would have managed even exams given her writing deficits relative to the demands.

Those gaps are a real beast to work around; you sort of have to manage it like a 2e issue that you get no real support or understanding for, to tell the truth.

It's unfortunate, but it means acceleration to the point that the weakest skill set can be made to TOLERATE, and then afterschooling/supplementing to accommodate the need for more depth/rigor/challenge in the placement.

Conventional school means of assessment definitely are an obstacle for radical acceleration. My sib's experience was certainly not the norm for anyone, and was greatly facilitated by interested faculty members allied with parents, as well as the choice of a math-focused major. And I should note that wet labs also were pushed off as late as possible, to minimize safety issues from differences in physical stature. But the fact that the overall arrangement was allowed definitely worked to the advantage of my sibling, who would otherwise have had an even more trying educational experience. It's unfortunate that more students do not have access to accommodations for relatively "simple," but pervasive, obstacles like writing. If there were some way to write accommodations for asynchrony due to giftedness, in the same way that there are post-secondary 504s for asychrony due to LDs, it would really help kids in this situation.

I also don't think we will be able to swing a similar arrangement for our own writing-discrepant child, in the absence of special faculty support.

And as to placement criteria, as we are homeschooling, until each of our children exhausts the secondary curriculum, I have targeted 80-90% (accuracy on end-of-course assessments, not percentile), as the upper half of the ZPD, on a subject-by-subject, year-by-year basis.

Our school district wants to see >95 percent accuracy for the curriculum skipped (including unit tests tied to the curriculum, which I think is ridiculous). So DS was given the district second grade math assessment in first grade and scored 98.5% accuracy (out of about 140-150 questions he got two wrong), but wasn't nearly as accurate on "unit tests" which has questions like "draw a math mountain for this equation..." (or whatever)...unless you've sat thru the lectures it's not necessarily going to make sense. The principal said we can subject accelerate DS for math but I'm not sure if the district is going to go along with it, or if it's even a good idea because a one grade acceleration for math is still going to be too easy. When we did a whole grade acceleration for DD a couple years ago they weren't nearly as rigid. I think they wanted 98 percent on the district tests for reading and math (which involved curriculum that would be missed) plus a certain CogAT score but there were no unit tests involved.
I'm not sure what is "reasonable" but just wanted to say what our district requires. Apparently there have been some kids that passed the district tests (scored 98+ percent accurate), they were moved up, and didn't do well which is probably why they are more rigid now and want perfect scores on unit tests as well.

When I was a child, my mother targeted 50th %ile of the following grade for whole grade skips. E.g., 50th %ile of 4th grade to skip into 3rd. She did have to do a considerable amount of advocacy-bordering-on-polite-harassment to accomplish them.

Districts I've worked for or known policies for have looked for 95th %ile in receiving grade. I think it's an attempt to address perceived negative social effects from advancement, by keeping the academics barely challenging. Also maintaining the high grades and test scores they would otherwise be expected to have.

Using this technique (assuming she used standardized test scores), my son should have skipped from 1st to 3rd, then from 3rd to 5th, then from 5th to 8th, then from 8th to 12th. So he would have been age 7 in 3rd grade, age 8 in 5th, age 9 in 8th, and age 10 in 12th. Yikes!

I think this is too stringent. Some prominent researchers on gifted education have a recommended an 85% threshold, within a different overall process:

http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/Articles_id_10248.aspx
Applying a mentor model for young mathematically talented students
Printer Friendly Version
Lupkowski, A., Assouline, S. & Stanley, J.
Gifted Child Today
Prufrock Press
Vol. 13
March/April 1990

Kai, that is roughly where DD's majority skills would have placed her, believe it or not. We slowed that particular trajectory just twice-- at 7th and again at 11th grade. I'm still not sure that wasn't in error, truthfully.

Of course, we would have preferred about 75th-90th percentile, but more often got 95th-99th-- thus my statement about not being entirely sure that this wasn't a mistake.

So if acceleration becomes an issue, should we put aside existing testing (e.g., out-of-level EXPLORE, RIT scores from MAP testing) and request additional testing (in the form of units in the school's upper-grade curriculum)? Or did anyone find these other types of measures helpful at all in determining an appropriate level/ZPD?

Not exactly "useful" but then again, we didn't really understand what we were looking at with DD at the time, Loy. So when we tested DD +1yr out of level and she ceilinged EVERY subsection on the achievement test... we just interpreted that to mean that we needed to probably go "to the next year."

What we SHOULD have done (hindsight being 20/20) is gone up at least 2y in the achievement battery and tried again so as to get a clearer picture of where she started to come down from those ceilings. Does that make sense?

I'd say that grade level achievement testing probably can be quite a powerful tool-- if you understand that "99th percentile" means... this test was too easy for the child, we should evaluate after going up a couple of grade levels.

The "yikes" was me envisioning my son with a 7 year skip at age 10. I know there are others for whom it would be appropriate (at least from an academic standpoint).

When my son was 10, he was at the 90th percentile as compared to end of year 7th graders, so placement in 8th grade that year would have been fairly appropriate academically. And now that I think about it, his Algebra I class that year was the only class where he was challenged at all.

I have noticed over the years that he does best at the level where his test scores place him around the 90th percentile--which makes sense, as the 90th percentile tends to indicate mastery.

The question about regular, honors, advanced level of class when accelerating...I would never accelerate into a regular class (in middle or high school) here because I have been in the classrooms here and know the ability level of the regular classes and the number of non-readers, low level readers, non-English speaking, and horrible behavior of the students (whether the behavior is a defensive mechanism for the poor academic skills or the poor behavior leads to poor academics or some combination of the two, I don't know). My point is no way would I accelerate to a regular level class here in this district....but your situation might be different. It would just not serve the purpose of the acceleration. And middle school kids can be cruel...no matter what level the class is...but I think the honors classes could be less cruel/more accepting to having an accelerated student in their midst.

Like I said ymmv.

So aquinas - we've done NO subject acceleration to date - but that may soon change. We are not certain how acceleration should have looked or how it should look in the future...color me clueless.

HK, I can see where writing would be an issue for MANY young gifted students. For most, their minds are way ahead of their fine motor skills!

What you did sounds PERFECTLY reasonable - who EXPECTS a child to be THAT advanced?

When DD hit the ceiling in multiple subjects on multiple grade level tests, over multiple years - we finally broke down this year and had her take an above-level test. It was eye-opening for me, as she did better than I could have imagined when compared to the EXPLORE 8th grade group. Her skills vary by subject, with writing closer to grade level than many other skills. Her spring MAP test RIT scores back up the EXPLORE (beyond the 99th percentile and GROWING in the majority of subjects at a MUCH higher rate than expected, despite the original high scores - so much for the myth of "evening out" in 3rd grade) and may even suggest progress since the EXPLORE. Not sure where to go with this, but we are talking to the school.

I can see where there would be a preference to skip into an advanced instead of a regular class. I'm curious whether homework/workload becomes an issue here, too, with younger students. I have actually come to believe that all G&T classes should work by a flexible "readiness to learn" level, not age. G&T programs can include such a wide range of abilities and these children can change so quickly. But I'm just dreaming... !

Aquinas, sending you a PM.

Thanks so much Cookie!

I'm just popping online quickly and wanted to thank everyone for their feedback and timelines. I plan to respond personally to each of you as soon as possible, because your feedback is truly so valuable in helping me envision options for my son's education down the line. He is DH's and my world, and it warms my heart to know there are so many generous, engaged parents on the forum who share a passion for giving their children every possible opportunity and support. So thank you!

I typed half a post on this thread the other day and deleted it because it wasn't coming out right and I didn't have time to make it so. Let me try again. If the tone is off, please read that I didn't mean it so; I am just trying to express that the common way of thinking seems odd to me, because that may be useful input.

I get that in many school situations, subject acceleration is what you have to do because there's no better alternative. But if you're homeschooling (freely, not tied to school courses in any way), it seems odd to me even to ask the question that way.

Part of my hesitation is that, perhaps, this may just be evidence that DS isn't actually gifted. But [expletive deleted] it, I don't actually believe that. So it is relevant to say: in a good school, the best way to meet his needs (granted that they aren't all going to be perfectly met) has been not to use acceleration. If I were homeschooling him, I would simply abandon all notion of what grade he was in for each subject (just as I have for maths, the subject where he is treated differently at school). There is no age of students such that he is just like the average student of that age, even if you take writing out of the equation.

For basic skills:

- Reading: DS started to read by 2 (before he could talk, hence, I don't know exactly when) and for some years, a useful rule of thumb was that doubling his age gave a safe underestimate of what he could read. By the time he went to school at 4 he could read anything that interested him with ease, which included much science material aimed at adults (though I don't mean Nature; that used to be a bit hard, though he did happily try). Reading isn't a school subject after age 8 at school - it is assumed that all children can read by then, and the focus moves on to studying literature - so I don't really know what people mean by "grade 6 reading" etc. At 10 he often reads "light" adult literature (Asimov, Douglas Adams, Agatha Christie being recent favourites), but as he's generally quite happy reading what other children his age read, we haven't given him Proust.

- Maths:
-- he started school at 4 doing only simple addition and subtraction, took off that year...
-- completed ALEKS grade 3 and 4 maths aged 5,
-- and grades 5 and 6 aged 6 (all this very fast, it wasn't that that was what he did that year, just that it's a convenient label for something he spend a few weeks on that you may recognise)
-- aged 7 he completed the GCSE course aimed at 16yos here, and learned to problem-solve independently, and did ALEKS Algebra 1 (again, in a week or two, knowing almost all of it already)
-- aged 8 he did ALEKS high school geometry and Algebra 2, and a lot more problem solving;
-- aged 9 he did ALEKS Precalculus, yet more problem solving, and most of AOPS Geometry (which overlapped his tenth birthday)
-- aged 10 his maths teacher says "he could obviously do university maths" and I guess that's so, though he hasn't covered the whole school syllabus yet and we're in no hurry; he has competition honours that very few 18yo students planning to make maths their career reach.

(By the way, aeh, if there's really no maths in elementary school other than the four operations, you need better elementary schools!)

So actually, in both, "twice his age as a safe underestimate" works not badly for both of those basic skill sets.

But in other subjects, the challenges aren't basic-skill related, nor are they limited by what the subject matter is. He's at liberty to make more sophisticated interpretations of sources, use a more interesting vocabulary, come up with weirder hypothetical questions, than his age peers if he wishes. Perhaps if he were an unusually fluent writer for his age or unusually social-chameleon, I might feel there was benefit in putting him up a lot of years to get peers who were more likely to be doing the same (I think HK has found this, in particular), but as he isn't, the few years that would be practical doesn't feel like a benefit worth having. And "what grade level is he working at in history" say, feels like a non-question.

Yes!

ColinsMum,

Unless you have seen it with your own eyes it is impossible to believe just how drastically the brain tumour of Political Correctness has impacted education in the USA.

Back in the UK in the early 70s the 3 Rs were assumed to have been grasped by 8 with reading (along with using a dictionary), arithmetic and cursive handwriting mastered. Alas! Here on Planet USA a school producing similar results that was not a Homeschool would be a rare bird indeed.

I can tell you what I meant. It was the general level (or levels, as mostly listed ranges) of the books my son read for pleasure combined with what I assigned. It seems important to list a general reading level in order to have an understanding of that aspect of the child's academic functioning.

Why?

(To be slightly more helpful: once decoding is no longer an issue, which I suppose is what DS's school is placing at 8 for a mixed-ability class, I would expect that the fiction a child enjoys reading is determined by sense of humour, presence of characters with whom the child enjoys empathising, degree of suspense enjoyed, etc.; the science factual material is determined by scientific background knowledge; the political opinion by exposure to political thought, etc. Lumping this together into a "reading level" seems unlikely to be practical or helpful.)

So, some of us use reading as a proxy term for language arts or English or whichever term is in vogue in whichever country.

Also possible, but notice that it's completely different from what Kai said, so at least my feeling that the usage may be problematic is justified!

The problem with doing this is that writing is a much different issue than reading. I didn't even list my son's writing level because I honestly don't know what it is or was. And when I discussed his work with our homeschool advisor, *she* couldn't tell me either. I do know that his handwriting is messy and slower than even age peers. His composition skills seem variable to me--as in one day he'll write something very solid without a lot of editing help and the next will produce a total mess. I also know that his "Revising Written Materials" score on the Iowa test this year was at the 98th percentile as compared to 9th graders, but I don't know how much that correlates with actual writing skills.

Yes, so what I should have said is I use reading as a proxy term for that aspect of English, language arts, etc. specifically excluding writing. Because for me having a possible dysgraphic, his level of instruction on writing doesn't seem useful to this discussion.

I tend to agree.



This, exactly. I'll go even further and point out that there is no age of MG students who are just like PG ones, either.

It's the underlying problem with acceleration OR enrichment as differentiation. There just aren't enough other students "like" any child at very high LOG (and by "like" here, I mean sharing both ABILITY and INTERESTS with such children).

DD has been more or less reading on an adult level since she was about 7-ish years of age. And I don't just mean the newspaper and media sources, which aren't truly at a post-secondary level. I mean real adult literature, too. Dickens, Shakespeare, Poe, etc. The stuff commonly taught in college Lit coursework and good 11th-12th grade English Lit. But she mostly wasn't that INTERESTED in that kind of literature as a steady diet. George MacDonald and Tolkein were lovely, but there just isn't that much of that kind of thing when you read at the rate that she does. She likes clever writing and humor.

Acceleration as a means to meet needs only goes so far. It's the only way to ease a super-poor fit... but it's not what I'd call "adequate" to make it a GOOD one, if that makes sense.

Reading levels....

Grab books from each reading grade level and look at them and you will see a big difference. There is a difference between Sarah Plain and Tall (3rd), Beverley Cleary' Henry Huggins books (late 4th) and lit leveled at 5th grade.

But he doesn't need 2 weeks on Sarah Plain and Tall when he can read it in less than 45 minutes plus pass a factual test on comprehension and a vocabulary test. He would need another 20 minutes on lit analysis and be ready for the next book and the rest of the class is moving on to the second chapter and having to really study the vocabulary words from chapter one.


Maybe our situation is clouded by the fact that many (feels like the majority) of the children in our district are English language learners, or bi lingual or some category of ESOL. Most of the students at our school are 1,2,3 level out of a 5 level system where three is proficient and 1and 2 are below level in the standards of reading. Because they won't completely ability group...the only way to get hard enough work is to go higher.

Tolkien, please (You, or she, might like to visit
http://www.tolkeinsociety.org/ :-)
Tolkien is sufficiently important to our family that I may feel the need to delete this post shortly; please don't quote it! But yes, if I had mentioned The Silmarillion as something DS devoured on the way to this great event a couple of years ago (and could have devoured earlier than that, if he had happened on it), my incompetence to pronounce on typically developing reading might have been clearer; I should probably realise I'm in a hole and stop digging.

Did you/she realise that there is a lot of The History of Middle Earth, btw?

I think there's something to be said for levels of reading ability well beyond achieving fluency. Parsing grammatically complex sentences; tracking a flow of thought across multiple sentences (including anaphoric coreference); extracting crucial information that is not stated literally (e.g. through sarcasm, understatement, and other deliberate violations of Grice's maxims); tolerance for a slow start to a plot; and so on.

I think that a gifted child follows a "unique" path. There are no two gifted children whose paths are the same. My child at age 5 finished all "elementary" grade math (using multiple challenging curriculum) - this could have happened at age 4 and maybe I did not test him then. At age 6, he can diagram complex sentences and can write poetry (a few different styles)- this goes beyond reading at "X grade level" and comprehending higher level books. I have absolutely given up on tracking his grade level - because he maxes out scores in above level achievement testing all the time. Science has been done using only one curriculum and a ton of hands on activities at our science museum and many months of science/innovation camps during the summer. What his grade level is on science is impossible for me to measure.

My best advise to a parent who accelerates is this: provide resources at all levels to your child - some at a higher level to keep learning new things, some at a lower level to reinforce/review already learned concepts. Keep challenging them to think and learn every single day.

It's finally sunk in that my reading level plateaued at about grade 5 level.

I could also add: catching cultural references; familiarity with idioms; tolerance for archaic vocabulary and grammatical constructions.

I distinctly remember learning an intolerance for archaic vocabulary in high school.

Yeah my son has most of that but needs instruction in those those of things including tolerating writing in dialect like southern country (thinking about books like the yearning). But most of his class mates are not at that level and need support for just basic comprehension.

Well said!

Yeah. My little beast has all of these to maybe a middle-school level or beyond, with the exception of tolerance for plots she deems boring. But for the mechanics of reading, she could barely be called an emerging reader. So where does that place her for "reading"?*


*That's a rhetorical question.

I get why you are asking this question and kudos to parents who have continually track their children's progress relative to their understanding of their specific local curriculum.

I have never tried to do that. On the one hand, it is just too much effort and time to get an accurate analysis; on the other hand, I don't know what I would do with that particular information. In my limited experience, the acceleration that they "need" is not the same as the level just above their mastery, if that makes sense.

Having said all that, there are specific key points such as acquisition of abstract thinking, reading comprehension of popular/typical adult materials and ability to produce a research paper independently, etc, which signal a student's readiness for the next level.

Unfortunately, I don't think that you can predict your DS' trajectory based on their current position. In fact, I think that the more gifted the child, the more unpredictable the potential trajectory. For example, I don't think that my DS read when he entered K at age 5, but he was reading Harry Potter independently by age 6 and not long thereafter was reading typical adult materials. Of course, typical adult materials are more likely at the middle school levels (grade 6-8) and the depth of understanding can vary as well. There is also a big difference between the ability to comprehend non-fiction versus fiction with the latter generally substantially lagging the former. As another example, DS was applying multiplication/division by age 4 (perhaps earlier?) and intuitively able to solve multi-step algebraic equations by age 7 but I don't think that it would be accurate to say that DS was at our district's grade 3rd and grade 8th levels at age 4 and age 7 respectively. However, at age 7, DS was tested and did well on our district's benchmark type math assessments for grades 2nd through 5th and was formally accelerated to 3rd grade GT math which covers and enriches grade 4 math.

I interpreted the fact that DS was able to intuitively solve (without formal instructions) multi-step (only 2-3 steps) algebraic equations at age 7 as a signal that he has moved into the abstract thinking stage. This was useful in signaling his readiness to move beyond simple fact acquisition in the sciences/social studies.

Unlike another poster described, our district's elementary math curriculum contains far more than basic arithmetic. Elementary algebra, elementary geometry and elementary statistics (line plots, bar graphs, stem-leaf plots, etc.) easily constitute half of the elementary math curriculum and starts showing up by grade 2. However, it is true that due to spiraling, a gifted student may easily extrapolate higher grade level maths even in those subjects. In fact, this was partly what convinced the district to accelerate DS before all the red tape was satisfied because it was clear that he was not put through any outside math curriculum.

Particularly in areas of sciences/social sciences, I find it impossible to estimate a grade level. For example, curriculum and emphasis may change from year to year. For another, the students typically cover more than is in the published curriculum. There is also the issue that from grade 3 onward (if not earlier), it is not just an issue of input but output and the two can be closely intertwined. As an example, all 4th graders are required to produce a science project with all the written components (hypothesis, research, data tables/graphs, conclusions, etc.)

Finally, there is the issue of what grade level really means. For example, if you look to the MAP test, a 95th percentile 5th grader scores higher than a 50th percentile 10th grader in math while a 95th percentile 4th grader outscores a 50th percentile 10th grader in reading. However, I don't think that many parents would advocate their 5th or 4th grader be accelerated to 10th grade in those cases.

My post is all over the place but many prior posters have raised interesting but unrelated points.

Ashley, that's good advice.

Maybe instead of saying "what level has your child achieved?", a different way to ask the question is "what is the minimum level of skills you feel, say, 90% certain he has mastered in each area?"

It makes perfect sense that there will be confidence intervals around these estimates; probably wide ones for some domains. Learning is a fluid process of skills acquisition that doesn't conform to discrete edu-speak boxes.

Part of the reason I'm asking this question the way I am, and at this time, is because I'm hoping to homeschool DS for kindergarten and subsequently open an HG+ micro school in grade 1. I'd like to appreciate the extent to which there is commonality in learning pace across HG+ children with abilities in different domains in the early years.

I'm working with some educators to build a first-pass curriculum plan for the early elementary years. So far, my template is assuming a baseline minimum of 3-4 years of acceleration in core subjects (math, LA, science, social science) by grade 8. The students will all have individual learning plans, but those will be predicated on a core level of common achievement.

I'm testing the hypothesis that there is rough convergence of raw ability in core subjects around age 6 for HG+ children. If it looks like there's wide divergence in learning trajectories among similar-ability children until a later age, I might have to push back opening a school in grade 1, or open it earlier because different home environments will amplify early differences in achievement. As you can appreciate, it's hard to reach a large number of local HG+ parents on a shoestring budget, so this is my early stage research.

Thanks again to everyone who has replied!

Don't worry; I get it, and I appreciate you synthesizing the disparate conversation strands in one post.

I completely agree that the notion of "grade equivalent" is an artificial one, particularly for high ability children studying in fields where there isn't a linear path of learning.

Sure, I'll PM you.

I would like to hear the discussion, ColinsMum, if you're willing to post it publicly.

Yup. I was only speaking half facetiously. Elementary math is pretty pathetic in the USA. Which is one of the many reasons why we homeschool. Even if you add in the data analysis that is the last unit of each year (read, the unit that gets omitted if the teacher/class didn't move quickly enough through the curriculum), the spiraling nature of most math curricula means there are about 15 seconds (not an empirically validated number, in case you're wondering!) of novelty for each unit each year, if you've actually mastered the prior concepts. The "new" material each year really is usually the same four operations, only now with one more place value. And then a few units of odds and ends, like very, very elementary geometry (which at this level is mostly definitions/names of shapes), units of measurement (which children who have exposure to real-life measurement, such as in the kitchen or the shop, ought to have some idea of), money (which is, of course, exactly the same as arithmetic to two decimal places, but is usually taught as a separate unit), and telling time on an analog clock (which Common Core expects to take four years to learn (k-3)).

I probably do oversimplify a little bit, but when you consider that fractions are just division, and decimals are just fractions, and percents just decimals...

I agree. Makes much more sense than sticking with arbitrary grade levels.


Wonderful! That is an ambitious but worthwhile endeavor. Best to you.

Yes, sounds fantastic -- and just what I'd love to see develop near us!

As others have mentioned and you are obviously aware, for us it is the pace of learning that makes our DC difficult to "fit" into a grade. I would love to have a multi-age HG+ peer group for learning/socializing/creative play. There's more I would say about our experiences of grade acceleration, but it seems you are most interested in info on academic development.

FWIW, here are broad strokes for our oldest, DS7:

Age 3: k math and 1st reading, no real interest in fine motor
Age 4: 3rd grade reading, 1st math, still not much writing

Age 5: 7th grade reading, 3-4 math (although not fast with math facts until 6), 1st writing, (with precise spelling.) Not sure about science/history grade level, but was devouring jr. high nonfiction science and history books.

Age 6: 9th gr reading/comp/vocab, 5-6 math (being a perfectionist, he mastered math facts because of weekly timed tests). Finally started writing and took off on that. School placed him at 6th grade writing, but I'd say 5th, for no real reason.

Age 7: not yet halfway through...

I'd be delighted to hear more broadly about your experience with acceleration! It's all germane to designing the school. Thanks for chiming in, mama2three.

Okay, relevant to your fact-finding mission, Aquinas, is this--

it is common now to "bundle" some subjects, which makes acceleration all but impossible in those areas if there is a missing support skill.

Consider "writing across the curriculum" and what that means for a child like mine, who had the writing skills of a 6yo agemate and the reading and analysis skills of a high schooler, and the interests of one, too, at least in some subjects.

It was interesting to me when I ran across some of our video from when she was 5-7yo and doing poetry recitations, delivering oral presentations, etc. I had forgotten how LITTLE she was at the time. It's very sweet to watch her lisp a little because of her missing front teeth, as she's discussing the causes of Shay's Rebellion, how a particular scientific invention works, etc.

It's stunning to watch her, and all the more so because I recall quite clearly that the work product that she is delivering there is way below her readiness and proximal zone.


If she had been permitted to learn science, literature, and social studies at the level she was READY for, rather than at the level she was ready to write at, things would have been far, far better for her.

Other kids, it's the reading level that is the weak link.

There is no gifted program at all in our district. So, the class moves fairly slowly. DS needs something radically different. (Mostly, I'm probably saying what others have said on this thread or elsewhere, but I'll continue.) There just is no grade where DS fits.

In a system, such as our district, which likes to subject accelerate kids into higher grade level classes that are working at an average pace, DS's pace of learning means that he will always be bored. It seems like we spend time advocating so that the school sees that he needs something harder, then they evaluate him, come up with a program, and by the time it is implemented he has moved to a new place. So, something more fluid and responsive would certainly be wonderful.

To elaborate we knew DS had mastered the academic goals of K before he began, but the district would not consider a skip and we felt it would still be "fun" for him. Turns out they just really had no idea where DS was at. The most instruction he got that year was the second semester when there was a student teacher. His teacher gave him 5 min a day, presenting grade 3 and 4 material. They both loved it. He could master it, make inferences, apply it to new situations and then she would figure out where they could go the next day. She was also fantastic at letting him run when he wanted to run. ( i.e. If he wanted to change a class assignment to make it more interesting/difficult, she was all for it.)

Lots of planning and a skip for this past year, which then placed him in a grade where he was still an academic outlier. He could have gone up another grade or two up for harder work in math, which would have been presented at a typical pace, or work by himself in his class. We chose the latter, but it was neither adequate nor ideal.

Having volunteered in the classroom both years, it was easy to see the vast range of ability within DS's classes and I was struck by the amount of time many kids need to learn concepts DS never had to learn, but just intuited from reading, conversations, etc..

As we plan for next year, there are no ready solutions, but we are choosing a school with smaller classes where they have had a EG or PG student recently and seem to be more familiar with potential needs/ideas for accommodations.

Best wishes on your project!

In response to a question about how my DS's school manages to be flexible enough that we don't need to use acceleration:

It's a prep school, in the British not the American sense: preparing pupils for senior schools they go on to at 13. One of the things that attracted us to the school in the first place was that they have a very free-flowing, play-based set up in the pre-prep (up to the age of 8ish) and then a much more academic approach in the upper school (up to 13). Everywhere else we looked at had one or the other!

It's very well resourced, and has small classes (max 16) and the impression one gets is that teachers are not stressed out the way teachers often seem to be. Maybe they have more preparation time than most teachers, because there's games every afternoon and although many staff do help teach games, they don't do it every day? Whatever the reason, the staff seem to relish differentiating rather than regarding it as a chore.

One thing that has struck me forcefully as DS goes into the upper years of the school is: incentives are aligned. The school is not academically selective at intake, but its reputation rests on getting very competitive scholarships at output. And those scholarships often require the kind of high-level thinking that HG+ children are so often not encouraged to do (see e.g. http://www.etoncollege.com/KSpapers.aspx ). So at this school, it isn't just the right thing to do to consistently stretch DS: it's concretely in the school's interests to do so. My guess is that this helps across the board: no teacher feels that they're indulging one individual in a way they shouldn't be, when they spend time helping him get to the next level.