Academic Effects
Academic outcomes are mostly positive for accelerated students (Kulik, 2004; 1984a; Rogers, 2010) in both the short and the long term (McClarty, 2015; Steenbergen-Hu & Moon, 2011) and acceleration generally does not create detrimental academic, social or emotional effects (Rogers, 2002a, 2010). Terman “disproved the notion of ‘early ripe, early rot’” (1954, p. 122) with findings that showed academic, social and emotional
benefits. Accelerated students do not “burn out” according to recent research (Wai, 2015).
Kulik and Kulik (1984b), Kulik (2004), Rogers (1991a, 2010), Kent (1992), Hattie (2009), Steenbergen-Hu (2009) and Steenbergen-Hu and Moon (2011) have all shown
58
the positive academic effects of acceleration. Such studies have shown that “no other
arrangement for gifted children works as well as acceleration" (Kulik, 2004, p. 21). Kulik’s (2004) comparison of accelerated students with non-accelerated students
demonstrated a large impact of ES+.8, as did Hattie’s (2009) analysis of acceleration on student achievement of ES+.88. Similarly Rogers’ (2010) findings of the academic effect of acceleration were positive at ES+ .68. Students perceive that acceleration is a positive intervention especially for academic challenge and achievement (Gross et al., 2011; Wardman, 2010). Longitudinal studies have also confirmed positive academic outcomes from acceleration (Benbow, Lubinski, Shea, & Eftekhari-Sanjani, 2000; Bleske-Rechek, Lubinski, & Benbow, 2004; Brody, 2005; Gross, 2006; Lubinski & Benbow, 2006; Lubinski, Benbow, Shea, Eftekhari-Sanjani, & Halvorson, 2001; Lubinski, Webb, et al., 2001; Muiznieks, 2000). Other long-term effects include more prestigious careers with greater earnings (McClarty, 2015), satisfaction with educational and occupational choices and “the impact of those choices in other areas of their lives”
(Wai, 2015, p. 81).
Social and Emotional Effects
Concerns regarding acceleration have frequently centered on social and emotional outcomes (Colangelo, Assouline, et al., 2004a; Gross & Van Vliet, 2005; Vialle et al., 2001). For example, social and emotional outcomes were at the forefront of concerns by school psychologists, principals, teachers, and gifted and talented coordinators (though slightly less concerned) in research (n=554) conducted by Southern et al. (1989). However, research has also found that “accelerants equal or surpass non-accelerants in
self-concept, self-esteem, self-confidence, social relationships, participation in
59
In Gross et al.’s (2011) research students did not believe that they had lost self-esteem or peer friendships and they felt positive about themselves and their school experiences. However, the students were aware that future issues could arise if acceleration was continued and they had some social concerns that they might be bullied. Students in Wardman’s (2010) research who had been grade-skipped made friends with older
students, and made adjustments socially to age dependent activities, for example alcohol availability, to fit in.
Rogers (2007) reported that the research for subject-based acceleration has been significantly positive in regards to social and emotional effects for gifted students. The social effects of grade-skipping are very positive, and are slightly positive for other forms of acceleration such as early admission to college. Rogers also noted that “emotional impacts are small and positive throughout” (p. 388) for different forms of
acceleration. Gifted students believed that being grade-skipped (Lee et al., 2012) did not affect their socialisation with others nor did they feel it caused depression. Robinson (2004) and Richardson and Benbow (1990) point out that accelerated students are not more psychologically vulnerable than other students.
Kulik (2004) described acceleration as “not short changing” students socially or
emotionally (p. 13). He pointed out that self-esteem could be affected with the “big fish little pond effect” (p. 21), but the drops were described as “trivial” for same-age
accelerated students and “small” with older control grouped students. If these effects did
occur, it was only for a short period of time, as also found by Wardman (2010). Acceleration has been shown to contribute to students having a realistic self-esteem (Colangelo et al., 2013).
60
However, not all research has reported positive social and emotional effects. Neihart (2007) was more cautious, reporting, that with careful identification students showed academic as well as social and emotional maturity. They may “experience some social and emotional benefits” (Neihart, 2007, p. 333). However, the study explained that acceleration may not be beneficial socially and emotionally for all students. This was also a concern in Freeman’s (2001b) research of accelerated students. Gross and Van Vliet (2003) pointed out that the level of emotional maturity, as well as the academic ability of the student, should be considered with regard to acceleration (Gross, 2004). There was also some concern expressed in New Zealand:
At just under half the schools, gifted and talented students’ social and emotional wellbeing was not being nurtured through pastoral care. For example, there was little consideration of specific types of bullying of these students, or of balancing learning needs with social needs when students were moved into older age group classes for extension or acceleration (Education Review Office, 2008a, p. 37).
The report included all types of schools and levels not simply secondary schooling in single-sex girls’ schools.
Cultural Effects
There is an underrepresentation of students from difference cultures in gifted
programmes in high schools (Olszewski-Kubilius & Thomson, 2010; Webber, 2006) and in acceleration programmes (Borland & Wright, 2000). Students from low socioeconomic areas and certain diverse minorities, especially African American and Hispanics in the United States (Ford, Grantham, & Whiting, 2008) are underrepresented in United States gifted programmes, including acceleration. As Gagné (2011) and Ho
61
(2014) point out this is an equity issue. The most prominent explanations have centered on methods of identification and programme provision which may not be culturally appropriate (Ford, 2013; Ford et al., 2008). Teacher attitudes can affect teacher-student relationships which have a strong effect (ES+.72) on student achievement (Hattie, 2009). In particular, teacher cultural values and attitudes “influence teacher-student relationships, curriculum content, teaching styles and classroom climate, etc.” (Bevan- Brown, 2004b, no page given) and these affect the provisions for gifted and talented students and acceleration provisions.
In New Zealand “a strong plea was made against enrichment and acceleration
programmes that isolate Māori children with special abilities from their peers" (Bevan- Brown, 2004a, p. 187), and against withdrawal programmes which involve removing students from where they are socially and emotionally comfortable. Personal and cultural isolation may result (Bevan-Brown, 2009). Positive experience of one Māori student, selected as high achieving and accelerated in an accelerated class, was reported in a case study undertaken by Macfarlane, Webber, Cookson-Cox, and McRae (2014). Bevan-Brown (1996) has suggested that it is possible to accelerate within the regular classroom: “Individualised programmes could operate successfully within a group context” (1996, p. 107, italics in original). In particular acceleration might be provided using an ability group within the class (Mahuika, 2007; Weir, 2003).
Like Māori, Pasifika students are underrepresented in gifted programmes because they are not being identified (Faaea-Semeatu & Faitaua, 2013; Keen, 2006) or there is a lack of understanding or knowledge by teachers and the school. As Siope (2011) explained, Pasifika students “live in ‘siloed’ worlds in which their school, family and church lives are kept separate, and students learn not to draw attention to themselves at school”
62
(Siope, 2011, p. 10). Frengley-Vaipuna’s (2007) research on Tongan giftedness
explained that “some culturally specific factors such as talangofua (obedience) and faka ‘apa ‘apa respect may have a negative effect on talent development in a school if not properly understood by teachers” (p. 100).
Culturally responsive environments are needed for culturally diverse students (Bevan- Brown, 2005; Gay, 2013). However, there is a lack of research on effective programmes for gifted Pasifika students (Chu, Glasgow, Rimoni, Hodis, & Meyer, 2013). Though there is some evidence that at secondary school Pasifika students “report being more motivated when their teachers show they care about their learning” (Chu et al., 2013, p.
2).