Gifted students come to education with unique learning characteristics. They can learn faster, deeper, and broader, and they come to school with readiness, with starting points different from their classmates and need to be allowed to move forward with a faster pace. In order to provide challenging curriculum for gifted students, eight options for acceleration have been available on the basis of Special Education Law in Taiwan. In this study, using questionnaires, surveys, and interviews, the researcher investigated the effectiveness of the most often used four kinds of acceleration: curriculum compacting, grade-skipping in all subjects, grade-skipping in one or some subject (s), and acceleration in one or some subject (s). Results have shown positive effects of acceleration for gifted students. By accelerating on their strength subject (s), gifted students skipping one year or more than one year, performed well on top in their class. Beyond saving time, acceleration enhanced the students' attitudes toward schools.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BakerJ. A.BridgerR.KarenE. (1998). Models of underachievement among gifted preadolescents: The role of personal, family, and school factors. Gifted Children Quarterly, 42 (1), 5–15.
2.
ColangeloN.AssoulineS. G.GrossM. U. M. (Eds.). (2004). A Nation Deceived: How schools hold back America's brightest students (Vol. 1–2). IA: The University of Iowa, The University of Iowa, The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
3.
ColangeloN.AssoulineS. G.Lupkowski-ShoplikA. E. (2004). Whole-Grade Acceleration. In ColangeloN.AssoulineS. G.GrossM. U. M. (Eds.), A Nation Deceived: How schools hold back America's brightest students: Vol. 2. (pp.77–86). IA: The University of Iowa, The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
4.
DíazE. I. (1998). Perceived factors influencing the academic underachievement of talented students of Puerto Rican descent. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42 (2), 105–122.
5.
HomeD. L.DupuyP. J. (1981). In favour of acceleration for gifted students. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 60 (2), 103–106.
6.
Kaohsiung Bureau Education (2005). Kaohsiung parents' brochure of early entrance to elementary schools. (In Chinese). Kaohsiung City Government.
7.
Kaohsiung Bureau Education (2005). Parent Brochure for Gifted Children. Kaohsiung City Government.
8.
KulikJ. A. (2004). Meta-Analytic studies of acceleration. In ColangeloN.AssoulineS. G.GrossM. U. M. (Eds.), A Nation Deceived: How schools hold back America's brightest students: Vol. 2. (pp.13–22). IA: The University of Iowa, The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
9.
McCluskeyK. W.MasseyK. J.BakerP. A. (1997). Early entrance to kindergarten: An alternative to consider. Gifted and Talented International12 (1), 27–30.
10.
Ministry of Education (2004). The Rules of Early Entrance and Grade-Compacting for Gifted Students in Collections of Special Education Law and Regulation. Taipei, Taiwan.
11.
ParkeB. N. (1989). Gifted students in regular classrooms. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
ReisS. M.BurnsD. E.RenzulliJ.S. (1992). Curriculum compacting: The complete guide to modifying the regular curriculum for high ability student. CT: Creative Learning Press.
14.
ReisS.M.McCoachD.B. (2000). The underachievement of gifted students: What do we know and where do we go?Gifted Child Quarterly, 44 (3)452–170.
15.
ReisS. M.HebertT. P.DiazE. I.MaxfieldL. R.RatleyM. E. (1995). Case studies of talented students who achieve and underachieve in an urban high school. Storrs, CT: The University of Connecticut.
16.
ReisS. M.WestbergK. L.KulikowichJ.CaillardF.HébertT.PluckerJ. (1993). Why not let high ability students start school in January?: The curriculum compacting study. CT: University of Connecticut, National Research Center on the gifted and Talented.
17.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: A how-to guide for educational excellence. CT: Creative Learning Press.
18.
RenzulliJ.S.SmithL. H.WhiteA. J.CallahanC. M.HartmanR. K.WestbergK. L. (2002). Scales for rating: The behavioral characteristics of superior students(Rev. ed.). CT: Creative Learning Press.
19.
RimmS. (1995). Why bright kids get poor grades and what you can do about it. New York: Three Rivers Press.
20.
RimmS. (1997). An underachievement epidemic. Educational Leadership, 54 (7), 18–22.
21.
RimmS. B.LovanceK. J. (1992). The use of subject and grade skipping for the prevention and reversal of underachievement. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36 (2), 100–105.
22.
RobinsonN. M. (2004). Effects of academic acceleration on the social-emotional status of gifted students. In ColangeloN.AssoulineS. G.GrossM. U. M. (Eds.), A Nation Deceived: How schools hold back America's brightest students: Vol. 2. (pp.59–68). IA: The University of Iowa, The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
23.
SuppleeP. L. (1990). Reaching the gifted underachiever program strategy and design. NY: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.
24.
TermanL.M.OdenM.H. (1959). The gifted group at mid-life, thirty-five years follow-up of the superior child: Genetic studies of genius, V.3. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
25.
TomlinsonC. A.KaplanS. N.RenzulliJ. S.PurcellJ.LeppienJ.BurnsD. (2002). The parallel curriculum: A design to develop high potential and challenge high-ability learners. CA: Corwin Press.
26.
TsaiD.M. (1996). An enrichment model: A study of developing a pilot program for gifted students (I). (In Chinese). Granted by National Science Council in Taiwan (NSC 85-2511-S-017-010)
27.
TsaiD.M. (1998). A study of family impact on underachieving gifted students(I) (In Chinese). Granted by National Science Council in Taiwan (NSC 87-2413-H-017-005)
28.
TsaiD.M. (1999). An enrichment model: A study of developing a pilot program for gifted students. Gifted Education International, 14, 66–78.
29.
TsaiD.M. (2000). Factors influencing the reversal of underachievement in gifted students. (In Chinese). Granted by National Science Council in Taiwan (NSC 89-2413-H-017-021)
30.
Van Tassel-BaskaJ. (1994). Comprehensive curriculum for gifted learners (2nd. Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
31.
WhitmoreJ. R. (1980). Giftedness, conflict, and underachievement. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
