<p>The problem is that very gifted kids have few peers and are as unlikely to find them in a traditional classroom as they are in an accelerated one. They will most assuredly not find their peers in a college with below-average normal aged undergrads as would be the case in the colleges listed in the article. In fact, I don’t know that we can assume that all the children in this family were so very gifted that they needed this acceleration. I know a number of homeschoolers who accelerate their bright, not brilliant kids a few years and ‘help’ them do their college work around the kitchen table. By the way, this isn’t to pick on homeschoolers. There may be plenty of other parents who help their kids on their community college work although I personally don’t know of many. However, homeschoolers often accelerate for reasons that are unrelated to student giftedness but, rather, because they prefer having someone else teach a particular subject such as foreign language or lab science or because their area has grant money for dual-enrolled students or even because they figure, 'If my kid has to take Spanish anyway, why not have him get credit for it? So the kids are enrolled in college and are taking classes like Spanish I or College Algebra that do not represent an accelerated curriculum.</p>
<p>I have no reason to think this family doesn’t fall in this camp. As a matter of fact, I suspect they do. Why? Because they make it clear that their acceleration plan is not just for brilliant kids and they are trying to sell this to the masses. If they were trying to show the proper way to educate a very gifted student, their product would have far less reach. </p>
<p>A few decades ago, one U.S. homeschooling ‘pioneer’ became known for this approach (accelerating bright, but not brilliant kids). Her name was Joyce Swann and her method consisted of purchasing pre-boxed curriculum from a private school (it was important to use an accredited private school she said at the time so the grade level would not be challenged), starting her kids in 1st grade early (I believe at age 5yo) and doing school around the year. If I remember correctly, the private school curriculum had lesson plans for 160 days, so parents could add in a few field trips, missed days for illness, etc. Instead, she advocated doing school 5 days a week, around the year (they may have taken 2 weeks of vacation from school or something very limited like that but I don’t remember) and, in this way, the kids would naturally progress at least 3 years for every 2 they were in school. So, by the time the kid were 10 years old, they could complete all of elementary school. Then, she would enroll them in a not-very-challenging high school at a distance program. They would take about 2 years to do that and they would enroll in a distance college program which she would supervise. </p>
<p>To me, that’s just not only robbing kids of their childhood but it is actually hampering their education because there’s a lot more to education than completing the material in the workbook or box. This has little to do with the issues surrounding extremely gifted children. Based on what I see of this family—choosing material which is not the most challenging, trying to create software for the average family—that is the goal.</p>