Gifted Bulletin Board

Welcome to the Gifted Issues Discussion Forum.

We invite you to share your experiences and to post information about advocacy, research and other gifted education issues on this free public discussion forum.
CLICK HERE to Log In. Click here for the Board Rules.

Links


Learn about Davidson Academy Online - for profoundly gifted students living anywhere in the U.S. & Canada.

The Davidson Institute is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting profoundly gifted students through the following programs:

  • Fellows Scholarship
  • Young Scholars
  • Davidson Academy
  • THINK Summer Institute

  • Subscribe to the Davidson Institute's eNews-Update Newsletter >

    Free Gifted Resources & Guides >

    Who's Online Now
    0 members (), 71 guests, and 12 robots.
    Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
    Newest Members
    garg, sciOly123, arnav, Advocato, Tee
    11,461 Registered Users
    June
    S M T W T F S
    1
    2 3 4 5 6 7 8
    9 10 11 12 13 14 15
    16 17 18 19 20 21 22
    23 24 25 26 27 28 29
    30
    Previous Thread
    Next Thread
    Print Thread
    Page 1 of 2 1 2
    Joined: Mar 2013
    Posts: 1,453
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    Joined: Mar 2013
    Posts: 1,453
    I saw this in the RH margin and decided to post here for others to see after it is replaced with a more current story:-

    Skipping - summary of research as it stands now


    Become what you are
    Joined: Apr 2013
    Posts: 5,254
    Likes: 7
    I
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    I
    Joined: Apr 2013
    Posts: 5,254
    Likes: 7
    This is an excellent overview/summary. smile

    Some of the research and authors mentioned in the article have been discussed in threads on the forums, including -

    1. "A recent report from Johns Hopkins University shows that about two out of every seven children are ready for a higher-grade curriculum."
    How can so many kids be invisible?
    Wasting money teaching children what they know

    2. "Our research A Nation Empowered shows many advantages to grade-skipping for talented students."
    What research am I looking for

    3. "Karen B. Rogers"
    Acceleration advocacy advice needed

    4. "David Lubinski and Camilla P. Benbow"
    Just saw this on the weekly DYS distro

    5. "Miraca Gross"
    Article about poor school fit?

    6. "Researchers have now developed a scale that can help a parent make such a decision for their child in kindergarten through eighth grade. The scale helps parents or teachers look at the main factors they need to consider when making such a decision. It also provides guidelines on how to weigh the relative importance of each of these factors."
    This is the Iowa Acceleration Scale (IAS), now in its 3rd edition: IAS-3.
    What research am I looking for

    There is a roundup of acceleration threads here.

    NOTE: The article linked in the OP ends with "This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article." That original article is found at this link, and it contains excellent links to its various source documents. Well worth a read!

    Joined: Dec 2012
    Posts: 2,035
    P
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    P
    Joined: Dec 2012
    Posts: 2,035
    If grade skipping were more common then the social disadvantages would be fewer. They say 2 in 7 could be advanced. Probably the same number could be held back. So 3 out of 7 are probably correctly placed. 4 kids in each 28 pupil class were accelerated it would become unremarkable.

    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 181
    V
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    V
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 181
    puffin fully agree here. We made the decision not to take up the grade skip given the social concerns given that it was the only kid ever been considered for the option at our school. Which made no sense.

    Joined: Jul 2014
    Posts: 602
    T
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    T
    Joined: Jul 2014
    Posts: 602
    Well, if you look at a bell curve it should really just be a no brainer, right? The middle 40% or 50 %so, in the average +/- 10 IQ range, correctly placed with a "grade level" (ie average) curriculum. About 25% to 30%on each side of the curve, give or take a few, a year up or down from "grade level". (Sorry about the passive aggressive quotation marks, can't help myself). And a few percentage points on each side who could do with a curriculum 2 or more years further out, if not necessarily with the acceleration or demotion into a higher or lower age group.
    You'd think it's a no brainer, but of course one could frame it into a scandal JUST being uncovered. Wait, they could write a book about it and call it, umm...a nation deceived or something? Like it might really get educators' and politicians' attention?

    Joined: Sep 2007
    Posts: 3,298
    Likes: 2
    Val Offline
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    Joined: Sep 2007
    Posts: 3,298
    Likes: 2
    Originally Posted by Tigerle
    Well, if you look at a bell curve it should really just be a no brainer, right? The middle 40% or 50 %so, in the average +/- 10 IQ range, correctly placed with a "grade level" (ie average) curriculum. About 25% to 30%on each side of the curve, give or take a few, a year up or down from "grade level".

    Maybe. I'm not sure. The IQ range for the 70th to 75th percentiles is 108 - 111. While I understand that IQ tests are flawed and there's more to academic ability than IQ, the reality is that these scores are solidly in the average range. The definition of a concept like acceleration is that it's something for people who are different. There is nothing wrong with average ability in a subject area, but it still isn't different. People of average ability don't make the varsity team in 8th or 9th grade (a sports equivalent of acceleration).

    I've already written up some suspicions I have about the claims that millions of children would benefit from acceleration. While I never got around to answering the replies to what I wrote, I'm still suspicious. I also can't help but wonder if the need to skip ahead could be due more to slowing the pace and keeping content superficial to ensure that the lowest performers pass the high-stakes tests.

    If we get overly inclusive and claim that 30% or more of students need acceleration, we create a situation that still completely fails to challenge gifted kids appropriately, because the accelerated/GATE/whatever classes will be serving kids who are above the average only in the purely pedantic sense that 108 > 100.

    The obvious solution is to group each subject by ability and not lower standards in any of the groups. This might mean magnet-type schools for kids with IQs at least 2 SDs above the average that, themselves, would be ability-grouped by subject.


    Joined: Jul 2011
    Posts: 312
    D
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    D
    Joined: Jul 2011
    Posts: 312
    Originally Posted by Jonathan Wai
    Another study, by researchers Gregory J. Park, David Lubinski and Camilla P. Benbow, that followed highly gifted children 40 years into their adulthood and examined the long-term impact of grade-skipping related to science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) came up with similar findings.

    Grade-skippers were found to be significantly more likely to achieve Ph.D.s, publish their first paper at an earlier age and achieve highly cited publications by age 50. Grade-skippers compared to non-grade-skippers were 1.6 times as likely to earn a doctorate of any kind, twice as likely to earn a STEM Ph.D., 1.6 times as likely to earn a STEM publication, and 1.6 times as likely to earn a patent.

    I suspect the outcomes reported in this study exaggerate the benefits of grade-skipping. Although the authors attempted to match the skipped and non-skipped cohorts, there is room for differences to be caused by unobserved variables. (This is mentioned in the "limitations" section.)

    About 80% of the students included in the study had never had a grade skip prior to identification. We know that grade skips are almost always the result of advocacy (typically on the part of the parents). Thus the "grade-skip" group is stacked with children of parents who are inclined to perform such advocacy, while the "non-grade-skip" group isn't. I doubt that matching for parental education, career prestige, income, or any of the other parameters used would alleviate this discrepancy.

    So how much of what they are measuring can be attributed to the skip itself, and how much of it can be attributed to having informed, involved parents who wont shy away from some advocacy?

    In the case of self advocacy, how much of the measured differences can be contributed to personality? Are the same students who will self advocate for a skip the ones who will have more advanced degrees and more publications, even when matched for intellect? Probably.

    That's my initial take on it, anyway. I went through it kind of quick, so let me know if there's good reason to disagree.

    Last edited by DAD22; 10/14/16 12:46 PM.
    Joined: Apr 2013
    Posts: 5,254
    Likes: 7
    I
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    I
    Joined: Apr 2013
    Posts: 5,254
    Likes: 7
    You raise excellent points.

    What are your thoughts on this -
    If more schools initiated utilization of the Iowa Acceleration Scale (IAS) as part of their policy/practice/process and therefore a grade-skip was not the result of strong parental advocacy... might the cohort of students who skipped one or more grades be more diverse... possibly leading to longitudinal study results which are more revealing?

    On the other hand, those students for whom the IAS indicated a strong likelihood of success after a grade skip may be a good match for your described group of students with effective self-advocacy skills... those with a positive, resilient personality... a certain je ne sais quoi.

    As you mentioned, rather than the grade skip being a cause of future success, the correlation of grade skip and future success may possibly be attributed to realizing that the endorsement to skip a grade may be responding to early detection of the same factors (skills and/or support) which later result in further success in advanced academics.

    Joined: Mar 2013
    Posts: 1,453
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    Joined: Mar 2013
    Posts: 1,453
    Quote
    ...I'm still suspicious. I also can't help but wonder if the need to skip ahead could be due more to slowing the pace and keeping content superficial to ensure that the lowest performers pass the high-stakes tests.

    I concur.


    Become what you are
    Joined: Mar 2013
    Posts: 1,453
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    Joined: Mar 2013
    Posts: 1,453
    But on the other hand over half of NJ were below grade level:-

    link here


    Become what you are
    Page 1 of 2 1 2

    Moderated by  M-Moderator 

    Link Copied to Clipboard
    Recent Posts
    Should We Advocate Further?
    by polles - 06/13/24 07:24 AM
    Justice sensitivity in school / DEI
    by Meow Mindset - 06/11/24 08:16 PM
    Orange County (California) HG school options?
    by Otters - 06/09/24 01:17 PM
    Chicago suburbs - private VS public schools
    by indigo - 06/08/24 01:02 PM
    Mom in hell, please help
    by indigo - 06/08/24 01:00 PM
    Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5