IME (first and, by impression, second hand) it's easier to get a child accommodated who is a long way ahead than one who is barely ahead, because it makes the teacher less doubtful that it's needed.
Great point! In a way, if you are going to want special accommodations for your son's special needs, it makes sense to give him the skills that are recognizable to teachers are 'advanced.'
Example - my son was quite 'normally bright' in reading and math, but very advanced in 'what is the meaning of life' sorts of questions. It was very very difficult for the school folks to see him as having learning needs different from his agemates. I think the school would love to see a 'little robot who even knows his multiplication tables, can tell time, tie his shoes, sit still, read' and feel, yes, this child is advanced and needs something different, because elementary school is all about taking wildly creative and quirky preschoolers and teaching them all the 'little robot' skills.
I don't mean to be critical of any early elementary teachers, as I don't mean 'little robot' in a pejorative way. I wrote it because that is how it will look to many of us gifted parents. I think 'little robot' skills are very very important to daily life...they just don't make my heart sing, see? And it may be true that part of the 'different developmental path' that highly gifted kids are one is that abstract reasoning comes earlier in the sequence than LRS.
I'm thinking most kids need LRS first, and develop abstract reasoning in late middle school, while my son did the exact opposite. Possibly he was flipped because LRS didn't make my heart sing and I wasn't experienced enough as a parent to delight in them, or possibly because that's a normal 'alternate' path for our kids. Anyone want to fund that study? 'cause I'd be fascinated to know.
Smiles,
Grinity
