MIXED-ABILITY CLASSROOMS

Ideally, in mixed-ability teaching, the pupils should be following the same theme to different depths, yet many teachers have a natural tendency to pitch the level of their lessons to the middle range of ability. A bright child, waiting for the class to catch up with what he or she already knows, may have to kill hours each and every day. In reality, however, there is probably very little true mixed-ability classroom teaching in Britain today: in 1994 less than 1% of schools used it in all subjects until the age of 16, exceptions usually being art, music or physical education (Benn & Chitty, 1996).

The normal classroom is a fairly structured place, providing activities for which the teacher attempts to harness pupil compliance to improve knowledge and basic skills. But both the uniqueness and the potential enrichment the gifted can bring to a class can be put at risk by conformity. These pupils are often less comfortable than others where there is a rigid teaching structure and limited pupil involvement (Freeman, 1991).

As a result of pressure to excel at school, Sternberg and Lubart (1995) found that the high-IQ highly-achieving pupil often had considerable problems in producing original insightful ideas. More than 200 teenagers in the Yale summer programme were divided via tests for Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Intelligence into 'high analytics', 'high creatives' and 'high practicals'. Each of these groups was compared with a balanced-gifted group (equally high in all three areas) and a balanced above-average control group. All the young people took a very challenging college-level psychology course, at the close of which they were assessed for basic recall, analysis, creative use and practical use of the new information. The 'high analytics', those who had often been identified as gifted by IQ, did worst of all the groups on the creativity tests. The authors concluded that these pupils had rarely been asked to make a creative effort, but had learned to conform to expectations of being good scholars by using memory to gain high grades. However, investigations into American prize-winners in the arts and sciences showed that a very high intelligence was not always essential for outstanding results ­ sheer memory was much more useful (Walberg 1995). It seems that whereas memory can be gainfully employed in creative work, it can also be abused for high-level school achievement.

Boredom

A child with a curious and speedy mind can suffer from boredom in an undifferentiated classroom. In America, Feldhusen and Kroll (1991) questioned primary school children about their attitudes to school. The questionnaire responses of 227 gifted children (identified by IQ) were compared with those of a random control group of 226. Although the gifted had normally begun school with positive attitudes, they more frequently complained of boredom, often because of the lack of appropriate challenge. In a similar American survey, 871 academically gifted pupils (identified by IQ and school marks) at each level of education were asked whether they found challenge in their lessons (Gallagher et al 1997). They replied that this only happened in mathematics and special gifted classes. But the researchers also cited evidence (p.132) of the absence of differentiated teaching in the American classroom.

Boredom for any child can become a demoralising and maladaptive habit leading to disenchantment with learning. To relieve this unpleasant experience, youngsters may escape into daydreams or deliberately provoke disturbance (Freeman, 1992). Or, when constantly faced with tasks which are too easy, they may make challenges of their own, like testing the rules (Kanevsky, 1994). They may also make mistakes, either because they are not paying sufficient attention, or just to relieve the tedium. A major problem for those who find learning easy is that they may not learn the discipline of study, getting by on what they remember from lessons, for which they will pay a price when they encounter more advanced work.

Another manoeuvre for coping with boredom is the Three-times Problem, which Freeman (1991) identified via self-reports. To avoid the boredom of listening to teacher's repetitions, pupils who absorb the information the first time develop a technique of mentally switching-off for the second and the third, then switching on again for the next new point involving considerable mental skill in several psychological areas. However, until this technique is running smoothly, they may miss parts of the lessons, so that teachers may underestimate their abilities. It is understandably confusing because the child seems so bright and yet is apparently not learning. As with all habits, this one tends to persist, especially if it starts early; some of the highly intelligent youngsters in the Freeman sample did not listen carefully to what other people were saying, often, they claimed, being distracted by higher thoughts.

Unfulfilled talent ­ underachievement

Because of their speed and style of learning, school experiences for highly able pupils are often different from those of other children. In an attempt to make friends and blend with the others in a mixed-ability class, such youngsters may try to hide their exceptionality. Butler-Por (1993), overviewing and evaluating 20 years of special classes for the gifted in Israeli normal schools, found that when teacher expectations were not high, underachievement in the potentially talented was hidden in a just-above-average school performance. She also found that the overriding reason for underachievement was lack of provision for learning. Emerick (1992) identified six alleviating factors:

Reversing the school performance of gifted underachievers Encouraging out of school interests. Working with parents. Co-ordinating goals associated with academic achievement. Improving classroom instruction and curriculum. Advising the teacher. Counselling leading to personal changes in pupil.

Emotional problems or inadequate provision of learning materials can lead to underachievement in any child, which can be exacerbated by mismatches between styles of instruction and learning. West (1991) examined the lives of ten famous visual thinkers, including Einstein, Edison and Churchill, all of whom had 'underachieved' at school. He presented developmental neurological research showing an association between visual talent and verbal difficulty, and concluded that the visually talented can encounter particular learning problems in a normal classroom where teaching is linear (one fact following another in a specified order). Although he does not indicate how such children can overcome these difficulties, he does provide guidelines for their recognition by teachers.

 

Some indications of learning problems of talented visual thinkers Poorly presented work and poor sense of time ­ possibly over-compensated by excessive orderliness. Excessive daydreaming. Difficulties with arithmetic ­ though not geometry, statistics or higher-level mathematics. Difficulties with speech ­ hesitation, delayed development. Sometimes poor physical co-ordination. Ineptness or lack of tact ­ but sometimes exceptional powers of social awareness. Difficulties in memorising assigned information by rote e.g. multiplication tables ­ but superb memory for interest areas. Difficulty in learning foreign languages, especially in the classroom ­ but sometimes an exceptional ability with their own language. May be overactive, inattentive and 'in their own world'.

Having surveyed the work of many American researchers, Deslisle (1992), in accord with Butler-Por (1993), concluded that all underachievement is a learned behaviour which is always tied to individual self-concept, therefore each case must be judged independently. However, Deslisle does make a useful distinction, between underachievers and non-producers whose school marks may be the same.

Underachievers ­ are likely to have emotional problems, with poor self-esteem. They find it extremely difficult to make changes to their behaviour on their own and can benefit from counselling help.

Non-producers ­ are psychologically strong and confident of their capabilities. They are choosing not to comply and are probably successful in their own way, such as in a street-gang, or perhaps are biding their time until they leave school and can choose how to achieve in a non-academic domain, such as in business.

The following indications of underachievement are drawn from various sources
(e.g. Treffinger and Feldhusen, 1996, Feuerstein & Tannebaum, 1993, Renzulli, 1995, Hany, 1996).

Some signs of underachievement in the potentially very able child Bored and restless Fluent orally but poor in written work Friendly with older children and adults Excessively self-critical, anxious and may feel rejected by family Hostile towards authority Quick thinking Does not know how to learn academically Aspirations too low for aptitudes Does not set own goals but relies on teacher for decisions Does not think ahead Poor performance in tests, but asks creative searching questions Thinks in abstract terms Often enjoys playing with language High-level work has deteriorated over time

Some suggestions for helping underachievers Affirm worth by praise for even small things Daily review of progress Involve the pupil in decisions about own education, e.g. setting own learning goals and so increasing motivation to learn Make the material relevant to the child's own interests Have pupil mark own work before offering it to the teacher Tutoring of younger pupils in underachiever's areas of strength Mentoring in area of pupil's interests Accept pupil without emotional strings

Grouping the highly able for teaching

Differentiation in mixed-ability teaching is often helped by grouping by ability or by a more fluid (e.g. vertical) approach based on mutual interest. An example of the latter is in musical instrument playing, where a group, e.g. of school brass players of varied ages and abilities, can meet to form a band - such interest often being an excellent indicator of talent (Renzulli, 1995: Hany, 1996). British mathematics teachers have been found to strongly prefer setting over streaming, which is in line with the benefits of the subject-specific approach, since streaming means categorising children by their overall ability, while setting relies on independent assessments of ability for each subject (Chyriwsky & Kennard, 1997).

At the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented in Connecticut, the effects of co-operative learning were compared for mixed-ability and gifted-only groups, with 786 11 year-olds drawn from 42 classrooms (Kenny et al, 1995). The results showed that the gifted did not experience any adverse emotional effects from learning with the non-gifted. Quite the reverse; they were seen as more friendly, better leaders and experienced an increase in social self-esteem. The gifted learned about as much as expected (i.e. not less), but there was no pull-up effect for the more average ability children, and their self-esteem went down. Thus the view of the gifted child as a stimulus to the learning of the more average ability child was not supported. Overall, the study found that the achievements of any pupil were largely independent of those of classmates (unlike HMI 1992 findings), nor did it provide evidence that grouping the gifted together in a normal curriculum was academically beneficial to them, though the researchers felt it might be, were the curriculum to be specially designed for them. However, the Canadians, Shore & Delcourt (1996), have said that such research cannot be trusted, and that co-operative learning can be detrimental to the gifted because:

• Their special learning needs are not being met.

• Comparison studies are not adequate enough to investigate this.

• Most research is done with wide variations in the ability of paired children so as to produce more significant results.

• Motivation in the gifted is reduced by denying them regular interaction with ability peers.

In an overview of American research on grouping by ability, Rogers & Span (1993) concluded that for the gifted, streaming improves their achievements, ambitions, critical thinking and creativity, but has little impact on self-esteem. They suggested that it is not so much the group make-up which has these beneficial effects, but the possibilities within the group to enrich or accelerate the curriculum.

In two large studies of young gifted teenagers in Israel, Dar and Resh (1986) investigated the effects of classroom composition on achievement. Their first study was of 700 pupils in the kibbutzim, and the second looked at 4,000 pupils in different kinds of groupings across the country. They concluded that average-ability pupils benefited most from mixed-ability teaching, and the highly able from ability grouping. This was particularly so in some areas, such as "the more hierarchical and abstract segments of the curriculum, namely in subjects like mathematics, some of the exact sciences, and foreign languages" (p.154), as well as special enrichment. Otherwise, they recommended that children be taught together for most lessons.

Aspects of peer-tutoring with differently able young children were investigated in Nottingham (Wood et al, 1995). The style of tutoring was found to be different when either a more able or less able child had the greater expertise. Where the high-ability child was the expert he or she taught more, but where the lower-ability child had greater expertise there was more collaboration in learning together. Thus, the make-up of the pair affected the outcome, whether of skills acquisition or conceptual change. But learning together with adults led to even better results for the highly able, notably in encouraging strategic thinking. The researchers suggest emphasis on "contingent instruction", namely that the tutor should immediately offer more help when a learner gets into difficulty, but less when a learner can do the task well. This suggested structuring of learning is in line with Vygotsky's concept of the Zone of Proximal Development (see above).

Effective tutoring by children calls for some maturity. It implies the ability to stand aside from one's own involvement, to provide 'space' for the learner to execute a task: to be able to regulate the learning of others requires the ability to regulate one's own instruction. In general, children who are best at teaching are also best at learning, though quick thinkers can be impatient with slower thinkers. Additionally, although older or more advanced pupils can be very helpful in teaching younger ones, this can be overused so that pupils who are teaching may not be learning during that time (Freeman, 1996b). Reciprocal teaching (Palincsar & Brown, 1984), in which pupils, or pupils and teachers, take turns at teaching, is a useful strategy in mixed-ability situations.

However, even in selective group-work these investigations have shown up problems. For example, the quicker pupils may leap to conclusions too quickly so that the slower ones cannot follow the steps by which these have been reached (if indeed definable steps have been scaled). Although in theory children can change ability groups, they very often stay where they are allocated, a problem for the late-developing potentially able child, who may simply conform to expectations when placed in a lower ability group.

Evidence on the two major types of provision for the very able ­ acceleration and enrichment ­ is summarised below. Acceleration is based on the child's already recognised advancement, whereas enrichment can also promote hidden potential. Hence acceleration is reactive while enrichment is proactive. No direct comparisons appear to have been made, though, of how each procedure affects different types of ability.

FORMS OF ACCELERATION

The term "acceleration" is understood variously. Mostly it implies grade-skipping, but for some researchers it can mean individualised provision of any sort which takes the pupils on faster. The many different forms of acceleration are usefully summarised by Montgomery (1996, p.66) and adapted here:

Different forms of acceleration Early entry into a new phase of education ­ from nursery onwards. Grade-skipping ­ promotion above age-peers by one or more years (in America it can be five). Subject acceleration ­ joining more advanced pupils for special subjects. Vertical grouping ­ classes which have wide age ranges of pupils so that the younger one can work with the older ones. Out-of-school courses ­ which give extra lessons in subject areas. Concurrent studies ­ a primary school child may be following a secondary school course etc. Compacting studies ­ the normal syllabus is completed in up to one-third of the time. Self-organised study ­ which the pupils do while the rest of the class is catching up. Mentoring ­ working with an expert in the field, perhaps class teachers or outsiders. Correspondence courses.

The cheapest, easiest and most usual form of special provision is to move a bright child up a class or more above his/her age-group: grade-skipping. In National Curriculum terms, the official recommendation is to accelerate stages (see below). But in spite of American evidence that acceleration can work well, it is strongly resisted by teachers and parents in many countries. Perhaps this distrust is because acceleration runs counter to the notion of healthy social development; and maybe it is similar to the distrust of research findings showing that large class sizes have no effect on pupils' achievements. But alternatively, how would a child react if his or her eagerness to learn were held back to the pace of a slower class? And, if the top few per cent are removed to a higher class, does that enable the next brightest to rise to the top and feel better about themselves? Or does taking away the bright ones also take away the stimulation they might bring to the classroom?

The major problem with grade-skipping is that the child 'hurried' on in that way may not be either physically or emotionally mature enough to fit in socially with the older children in the new class. Intellectually, certain subject areas (such as language) require the appropriate life experiences which come with age, and without these the necessary conceptual development may be lacking. Physically, a four-year-old is not as adept as a five-year-old, for instance, and particularly for grade-skipped boys, their apparently late physical development encourages the 'little professor' image of the child as being hopeless at everything which is not school-learning (or music). Research in France compared the self-concepts of secondary children in three groups; 22 who were kept back two years (double redoublement), 106 normal, and 12 grade-skipped (avance), by questionnaire under supervision (Robinson et al, 1992). Although there was no difference in self-confidence between the groups, the advanced group were the least well behaved.

The considerable disagreement about whether or not to keep a bright child with age-peers seems to vary with the culture. Whereas some countries, such as Spain or Denmark, do not allow acceleration at all, others only allow it in special circumstances. It is rare in Russia, although there are no prohibitions against it. In China, though, a school may take a child of any age into any stage of education, as long as the child has passed the examinations for that level. There is even provision there for children as young as 12 to attend two of China's technical universities. At both, a five-year course was set up in 1978 to provide for children from across the country, for which about 800 youngsters (mostly boys) applied in 1995, but only 43 were accepted (with an average IQ of 125). To date, 673 early students have graduated, the youngest being 11. Visiting one of the universities, the author's impression was of a high-powered boarding school. The senior tutor there described how the children are well tolerated by the older students, but do not mingle much with them; also that about 15% of the class were introverts and unable to speak their minds. No follow-up studies on the personal effects of this considerable acceleration have been conducted.

Almost all the research evidence promoting the benefits of acceleration is based on studies within the American educational system, where teaching is slower and less differentiated than that in Europe. Indeed, it has been found there that a gifted mathematician can accomplish a whole year's school course in three weeks (Stanley, 1993): would this be equally true in Europe? In some states, whole-class mixed-ability teaching is promoted to the extent that ability or interest grouping is actually prohibited. A report from the (US) Office for Educational Research (OERI, 1993) says that in international comparisons "our youngsters still rank at or near the bottom in all subjects tested" (p.10). This is countered to some extent by special programmes. Even by "1990, 38 states served more than 2 million gifted students", and since then "the number of programs for gifted and talented youngsters has grown substantially" (p. iii). Unfortunately, though, the US is still near the bottom of the comparison list.

In Britain, it is possible not only to accelerate children within the school, but to place pupils in part-time acceleration through higher education institutions. One school, for example, now has 10 pupils on a mathematics foundation course at the Open University in addition to their A-level studies. They are aiming to build up a bank of credits for when they reach university full-time. Israel too has a system for providing advanced pupils with part-time access to higher education, and the first follow-up of 2,495 children (including controls) shows it to be working well, particularly with regard to the pupil's satisfaction, and so it is set to continue (Shahal, 1995).

There is a steady flow of exceptionally advanced pupils in all areas of school work in Britain. In 1988 the Associated Examining Board found that of 493,069 GCE candidates there were 434 O-level entries from pupils under 15, including 30 from children aged 9 - 12. Of 170 A-level candidates under 17, one was aged 11 and another 9. What is more, their results were as good as or better than those of older candidates ­ at O-level, 35% of entrants under 15 got a grade A, compared with 9% generally, and 11% of young A-level candidates came away with an A, as opposed to 6% of sixth-formers. In their 1995 statistics, there were 43 candidates aged under 15 at A-level standard, but only 7 at GCSE grade (no further breakdown was offered). Unfortunately, we know very little about what sort of schooling and home circumstances produce such results: these precocious examinees have never been investigated.

Germany uses a form of differentiated teaching by school, each type of school aiming for different goals, such as technical or academic. In theory, as pupils develop and change interests they should have the choice of moving from one kind of school to another, and so acceleration is normally considered unnecessary. All the primary and secondary state schools in Lower Saxony were sent questionnaires on their experiences of grade-skipping between 1980 and 1990 (Heinbokel, 1997). The parents, 103 grade-skippers, 20 non grade-skippers and 19 grade-skippers, were interviewed. Almost all the grade-skipping (although only 0.012% of the child population) had taken place in the primary schools. The ratio of girls to boys was 1:6. Reasons given for grade-skipping were usually emotional ­ boredom, disruptive behaviour (especially in boys) and emotional withdrawal. Although the primary school children were found to be generally happy with the move and coped intellectually in their new class, 14% of the girls and 23% of the boys were reported by parents to have retained their emotional problems. In Hamburg, a secondary school survey of 73 academic and 37 comprehensive schools (77% responded) (Prado & Schiebel, 1995) found that virtually all the grade-skipping took place in the academic-type schools and at all ages. The acceleration was recommended by teachers, and two boys were accelerated for every girl. The social integration process proved to be problematic for some of the accelerated pupils. But this move was always seen as a last resort; most headteachers believed that there were better choices.

There are, in fact, other ways for gifted older children in Germany to exercise their abilities, such as the extremely high-level, fast-growing national competitions in many subjects (e.g. foreign languages and mathematics) which are heavily subsidised by the government (Wagner, 1995). The youngsters are prepared for these in their schools. The prizes are usually of an educational nature, such as payment for a course of the student's choice in any country or subject. Follow-ups are currently being conducted on the effects of these competitions on prize-winners, in particular how they have fared at university.

The success of acceleration in school has been found to be very dependent on the context in which it is done, e.g. the flexibility of the system, how many others in a school are accelerated, the child's level of maturation, and the emotional support provided by the receiving teachers. The age at which the acceleration starts could have different effects, a feature which has not been addressed in the research. In addition, it is often assumed that educational acceleration implies more complex content. However, the child may merely be working along the same lines as before, simply shortening the number of years spent in school. There are times, though, when grade-skipping may be the only option, and when care is taken of the possible problems it has been found to be successful.

But even American research on grade-skipping the gifted (whether defined by IQ or school marks) is divided. The major thrust for it has come from the considerable research in this area headed by Stanley and Benbow who have argued forcefully that acceleration "improves the motivation and scholarship of gifted students" and that fear of emotional and social problems is grossly exaggerated. However, Benbow recognises that acceleration (in any form) is not appropriate for all children, and has outlined factors to take into account when contemplating such action. They include (Benbow, 1991, p. 31):

 

Only accelerate when: There is no pressure to accelerate. The pupil is in the top 2 per cent of intelligence. The receiving teacher feels positive about it. The parents feel positive about it. The pupil is advanced in the subject area. The pupil is emotionally stable. The pupil understands what is involved. The pupil wants to be accelerated.

Support for grade-skipping comes from Australia in a 10-year case-study of just 15 children of IQ 160+ (Gross, 1993). Gross wrote somewhat dramatically that these 'profoundly gifted' children had emotional problems because, for them, learning with their age-peers of average ability was like restricting children of average ability to learn with "children who are profoundly intellectually handicapped" (p.475). She was strongly in favour of several grade-skips because "for children of IQ 160 a token grade-skip of one year, even when supplemented with in-class enrichment or pull-out, was no more effective, either academically or socially, than retention in the regular classroom with age-peers" (p. 486). However, in the Freeman (1991) sample which contained 23 youngsters of IQ 160+ in a variety of British schools, IQ was not found to be directly associated with emotional problems.

Even the academic long-term outcomes of acceleration are doubtful. For example, in a ten-year study comparing accelerated and non-accelerated pupils, even the pro-acceleration American researchers, Swiatek and Benbow (1991), found that by age 23 "few significant differences were found between the groups for the individual academic and psycho-social variables studied" (p.528). The most sure effect appeared to be in time saved at school.

The emotional effects of acceleration

In an overview of 26 American studies of acceleration, Kulik and Kulik (1984) found that only a few had investigated the emotional effects, and those had been assessed with paper and pencil tests ­ "not the methods usually used for measuring success in life" (p.89). Consequently, although the accelerated children had shown good academic progress, no conclusions, they wrote, could be drawn about any other effects of their advancement. Southern & Jones (1991) also found from their wide-ranging review of American research on the effects of acceleration, that the emotional consequences had been neglected by most studies. Nor has there been any research attempting to match pupils with the most appropriate form of acceleration. Yet there is the possibility that the very able might be emotionally more mature than their age-peers. In one study, highly-achieving, intellectually gifted young adolescents were found to be emotionally and intellectually closer to older adolescents than to their age-mates (Luthar et al, 1992).

The younger children are, the easier their emotional integration to an older class seems to be, whereas the changes of adolescence can exacerbate differences (Walberg, 1995). Intellectually, too, the effects of accelerated learning have been found to be easier when children are younger.

Begun in 1991, a four-year German experiment compared bright gymnasium (grammar school) pupils who took the Abitur (somewhat like A level) in eight years instead of nine with non-accelerated pupils of the same ability and age (Heller, 1995). The experiment included yearly testing, the provision of feedback to parents, teachers and pupils, and comparing final examination grades. The advanced group felt much more strongly than the non-selected group that their results were due to their own efforts, though they also showed a somewhat higher degree of anxiety. The teachers were found to have difficulties in organising small teaching groups and in promoting co-operation among the pupils. The main conclusion was mixed: primarily that teachers need special training for coping with acceleration; and that this should focus on discovery learning methods, corresponding pupil learning skills and approaches for co-operative learning. Without those special skills, the long-term value for as little as a one-year acceleration would be doubtful.

Most research on acceleration has concentrated on achievement, but self-reports (Freeman, 1996) have provided rare insight into the emotional effects. For the youngsters in the British sample, when a decision had been taken to accelerate it was usually initiated by the teachers with the (sometimes reluctant) agreement of the parents; few of the children had been asked. For 16 of the 17 accelerated children, normal growing-up problems had been decidedly exacerbated by this move ­ discovered through long home interviews. Both children and parents explained, for example, how difficult it was to cope with a typical problem of how late to stay out, as the older pupils in the accelerated teenager's class were given more freedom. Some of the accelerated youngsters perceived themselves as small, as did their friends, although they were of normal size for their age. The only pupil who was very pleased with the situation was a tall and mature boy, who said it enabled him to leave school earlier. One father said poignantly of his son who had been grade-skipped in a high-powered boys' school by two years: "I felt sorry for him; they were men and he was a boy". A gifted boy commented that if you go to university too young you miss out on so much: "You can't go into the student bar to start with".

The overall conclusion from research is that acceleration can work, particularly for mathematics and second languages, but with very strong caveats. A joint survey between Oxfordshire County Council and Oxford Brookes University of how 12 schools (first, middle and upper) educated their top 2%, found that it was fairly common for first-school pupils to do some work with older pupils when classes were of mixed age, but not otherwise (Oxfordshire, 1995). All the schools provided varied support for their most able children, though what worked in one school might not work in another. But from this and other research in Oxfordshire, the research leader concluded that grade-skipping could be considered as a school's failure to provide adequately for its very able pupils (Eyre, 1997).

In a review of American research on emotional development of the accelerated gifted, Cornell et al (1991) conclude that "few authors have examined socio-emotional adjustment with adequate psychological measures" (p. 91), and few have looked at the long-term effects. No data have emerged from any study to indicate which students will fare well in early college entrance programmes. The authors issue warnings about drawing pro-acceleration conclusions from studies, which are often carried out by researchers keen on the idea of acceleration but with inadequate concern for the complexities of socio-emotional adjustment. For example, a lack of differences between compared groups may not indicate a lack of problems, but rather the inadequacy of the instruments or methodology. Equally, studies which appear to show the beneficial effects of acceleration do not necessarily demonstrate the negative effects of non-acceleration.

 

Research on the socio-emotional adjustment of accelerated pupils A single measure of self-esteem is inadequate; multiple measures should be used in a developmental context, including family and peers. Self-reports can be distorted by defensiveness or lack of awareness. The child has only his or her own experience on which to base feelings and so cannot act as his or her own experimental control. Behavioural observation is valuable. Standardised tests provide reliable comparisons, but they will not record the special stresses of accelerated pupils, such as losing age-peers. Consequently, they should be used along with individual counselling sessions. It is not enough to compare a group of selected accelerated pupils with a non-accelerated group to show the effects of acceleration. Ideally, matched groups of equal ability and achievement should be compared, one staying in the normal classroom and the other accelerated. It is useful to assess the emotional development of the children both before and after the acceleration. Drop-outs from acceleration should be included in any study; they may be the ones who have experienced the most problems.

Acceleration within specialist schools

Gifted children who have a heightened awareness of the standards of excellence reached by eminent adults may aim higher than their current skills permit, which is particularly frustrating when they have no means of working towards their goals. Some gifts or talents, notably in music and the performing arts, do seem to call for special full-time education so that children can immerse themselves more deeply than in a normal school ­ and so move on more quickly within their discipline. Being in a specialist school may mean that children can move on individually, in groups or as a class.

There are now 60 experimental primary and middle schools in China with accelerated classes for intellectually gifted pupils of the same age. Keeping the class together is said to remove any emotional problems caused by accelerating above the age group. A comparison study between sixteen-year-olds who had been accelerated as a class was made with a matched group in normal education (reported in Zha 1995a). Using the Chinese version of the Wechsler Intelligence Test, little difference was found in IQ, but a big difference in ways of thinking. Those in the experimental schools were better on tests of memory, attention, spatial and mathematical ability, and consequently learning ability, whereas the others were better in language and the ability to generalise. The gifted in special classes, though, were more often found to have higher aims and were much more competitive (Zha, 1995b).

In Britain there are dozens of 'unofficial' highly selective schools for the academically gifted. Although they are now almost all private, most were originally Direct Grant Schools, some of which became effectively 'hot-houses' for the intellectually gifted in terms of academic success and Oxbridge entrance. These schools often move whole classes up by a year. There are also non-selective maintained schools which specialise in teaching certain subjects to a high level, such as the 222 Technology Colleges and Language Colleges (there are plans for 300 more specialist schools, as reported in TES 1997). These Language Colleges oblige the mixed-ability pupils to take two foreign languages, as distinct from the selective language schools in Russia which teach all subjects in a foreign language. Magnet schools aim to attract (rather than select) talented children to an area of excellence, such as music. Such schools can work like specialist schools in enabling children to learn at their own speed, effectively accelerating them within an accepting school context. However, no research has been done on these group forms of acceleration.