Among other advice in the section called "Number of Family Members in College", is the suggestion to consider "
having the younger child skip a year in school, to increase the overlap".
That does not seem a compelling or academically sound reason for whole-grade acceleration. Makes one wonder whether any parent has advocated that logic for acceleration to their child's teacher and principal?
You're really looking at this the wrong way. Typically any given cause will give rise to many effects. And typically any given effect will arise from many causes. You don't just look at one cause-effect pairing in isolation. Life is complicated and it is prudent to be well informed.
Please share the ways in which you believe "
having the younger child skip a year in school, to increase the overlap" has been looked at wrongly.
Please share alternate ways you see for looking at "
having the younger child skip a year in school, to increase the overlap", which are more accurate.
Regardless of truisms about cause-and-effect, please realize the article created this "pairing" of "
having the younger child skip a year in school, to increase the overlap"; I did not create that pairing.
Regardless of the truisms that "life is complicated" and "it is prudent to be well informed", is there anything specifically in this post which either presumed life was not complicated or one was not well-informed: << "
having the younger child skip a year in school, to increase the overlap"... does not seem a compelling or academically sound reason for whole-grade acceleration. >>
Do you believe that "
having the younger child skip a year in school, to increase the overlap"... IS a compelling or academically sound reason for whole-grade acceleration?
I do not believe the Iowa Acceleration Scale (IAS) considers this a factor.
