<p>this is a complex, tricky topic. Why? Because schools, kids and “college” each vary so much. </p>
<p>Take the schools. Some HS offer a depth of courses that rival the first year of some colleges. But some don’t. So one size won’t fit all.</p>
<p>Take the kids. Maturity, intellectual agressiveness and such vary all over the map.</p>
<p>Take the colleges. There is a world of difference between a poorly supported community college and MIT. Who is ready for which.</p>
<p>The final issue is the experience in the past with radical acceleration, which is basically what educational researchers call such double grade skipping. Julian Stanley was an early proponent of this, and followed kids who started college several years early. What he found was curious. In college, the kids did fine - good academically, reasonably well adjusted socially and such. But what he found out was that a number of them in later years felt they missed something - that later HS experience, and missed it with regret. </p>
<p>Unless things have changed since I last delved into this topic about 10 years ago, most researchers in the arena of gifted children believe it is better to provide extension opportunities in place. And that is, in fact, what is being done in most places. And it is becoming increasingly easy to do with various distance learning opportunities.</p>
<p>To me, the scariest part of this is that it smells like it is being done for budget reasons, not for the kids. But heck, since when did the educational leadership care about the kids? Seems to me they care first about themselves (keeping employment and salaries high), next about the political establishment, including elected officials, then about parents. If any time or energy is left over, they think about the kids. (slight tongue in cheek…)</p>