I mentioned to you last year that his strengths are in abstraction and fluid reasoning. These are areas that are likely to be more apparent to someone like his parent, who has the time and the varied experiences with him to see his curiousity and novel problem solving. A classroom teacher, especially in the primary years, may not have that opportunity when the rest of his presentation is (perhaps) dominated by the ADHD aspect of his profile, and when the focus of classroom instruction is very much on basic skills. As he goes up in grade, abstract thinking and problem solving will become increasingly important, which may allow some of his strengths to become more visible to his teachers. Correspondingly, basic skills would be expected to become automatic for the majority of students, so teachers will focus less on advancement in those areas (neat handwriting, fast math facts, etc.).
With regard to advocacy, may I ask how effective you think working on accommodating his ADHD and developing self-regulatory and executive function skills has been over the past year? With or without medication, this will likely be a factor in how noticeable or obscured his other gifts are in the classroom for many years to come. If you don't think it has been effective, this would be an area to investigate further.
And as I've mentioned previously, the kind of instructional approach that would benefit a GT learner with high abstract reasoning (such as your DC) has a great deal of overlap with that which would suit an ADHD learner. So on both scores, relevant, engaging, challenging instruction will be vital to his education (really, to any student's, but some other students can push through even when it isn't optimal).
GT placement isn't the goal. Appropriate education is. I would also encourage you to take it year by year. If he's learning as a whole person, and happy in school (which, this year, it appears he is), then good. No need to borrow trouble for next year!
