These old posts may be of interest -

1) Have you told your child about their test results? (Oct 2013)
Main idea: matching the program to the child, rather than matching the child to the program.
Concept discussed in Re-forming Gifted Education... also Education Planners... by Karen B. Rogers
Just as there is not a one-size-fits-all "special ed" program, but broad array of services to meet individual student needs...
there need not be a one-size-fits-all "gifted" program, as there exists a broad array of gifted needs to be met.
To suggest meeting various needs of gifted pupils, some schools/organizations state they offer "gifted programming" rather than "a gifted program."

2) How to Hothouse Your Kid (Oct 2013)
Main idea: The same program or activity may be "hothousing" for some children...
and much-sought-after academic/intellectual stimulation for other children who crave it.


Note: The concept of matching the program to the child (as described in the information at the first link above) directly contradicts advice given by Kai, which describes matching the child to the program:
Originally Posted by Kai
So instead of focusing initially on identification, you should decide what sort of program you can and want to offer. Then you design your identification plan so that it is able to select those students who will be able to benefit from the program.
By contrast, matching the program to the child begins with identifying a student's educational NEEDS*, then creates educational experiences ("programming") to meet those needs.

*For continuing growth and development, kids need:
1) appropriate academic challenge
2) true peers
For typical kids, these needs may be met in a general ed classroom, however for children with higher IQ/giftedness, these needs may not be met without intentional effort in providing advanced curriculum, and grouping for instruction with academic/intellectual peers. Some negatives which may occur when a child is not learning something new every day include these observations or signs that a child is not appropriately challenged.