Approximately three years ago, Nicholas Colangelo and his colleagues released a major report of significance. The report "A Nation Deceived" discussed the need for acceleration in the schools as an option for gifted children and adolescents. The report was exceedingly well received and continues to be read by parents, teachers, counselors, administrators and politicians around the world. In this interview, Nicholas Colangelo replies to some questions about his three year follow up regarding the report.The report, which should be read by all involved in education can be viewed at www.nationdeceived.org I recommend it most highly and appreciate Nicholas's willingness to share his follow up results with us.

1) Nick, I understand that you have just completed a three year follow up regarding your report on acceleration entitled "A Nation Deceived". What basically did you find out?

The report "A Nation Deceived" has received considerable attention and seems to be having a strong impact.  At three years, there have been almost 2.3 million visits to the website (www.nationdeceived.org) where people can read, download or order copies of the report—free !

We have had 50,000 orders for copies---these numbers indicate attention.  It seems this attention has also translated into impact.  We have heard from a large number of people indicating that they are using the report in discussion groups, in classes, and to inform school policies.  Many parents (and teachers) have indicated that the report was the basis for students being accelerated.  The online 3-year follow up survey indicated that 85% of respondents said that the report had a positive impact on their own attitudes toward acceleration.

Seventy-seven percent thought the report has had a positive impact on the field of gifted education and 51% thought it had a positive effect on education in general.  These are pretty impressive figures given that acceleration has had such a negative and conflicted history. 

The one finding that I thought was most compelling was that 99% of respondents indicated that the report would have a positive effect on gifted education in the long-run.

2) Why does it appear so difficult to change people's perspective on acceleration?

Acceleration has had a most unusual history as a curricular intervention.  In gifted education it probably has had the most consistent and robust research supporting its effectiveness with high ability students.  I have not come across anything in the research literature that is as compelling as the positive research about acceleration both in terms of academic benefits and in terms of social benefits.  But this research has not won the day in the war for the hearts and minds of educators and the general public.  The belief that acceleration can harm the academic and or social development of students has had traction for many years-- a striking example of belief trumping evidence.  I certainly understand that it is not easy to change attitudes and by no means do I think there will be an instant change because of this report—but in all honesty, this report is changing a fair amount of thinking.  Most importantly it is providing an arena for new and balanced discussion and that may be its major contribution.

3) How many subjects from the U.S. responded? How many from overseas?

There were 3,868 respondents from the US and 401 from other countries.

4) Are schools so preoccupied with NCLB and AYP that they are neglecting gifted kids?

No doubt that NCLB and AYP occupy the efforts and resources of our schools.  Gifted students are at best an afterthought in NCLB and more educators and policy-makers are recognizing this.  I hope that whatever is the future of NCLB that it include greater attention to those who excel beyond  the proficient level.  One of the real advantages of acceleration is that it is elegant and cost-effective. 

For example, you can grade-skip a student at no financial cost—you can subject accelerate at no financial cost.  The true cost is in the willingness to let students move at a pace for which they are ready—to deal with advanced material for which they are ready.  At the end of the day it is no more complicated than that.

5) I understand that you presented the results of your study at a national conference? What was the response?

I presented the results at NAGC ( National Association for Gifted Chidlren) in Minneapolis and there was a panel that responded both to the results of the survey and to the report in general.  The panelists were excellent and each represented a different perspective.  Del Siegle, the new president of NAGC, responded it terms of what the report has meant to NAGC.  Mr. John Stollar, from the Arizona Department of Education, gave the perspective of a school administrator: Dr. Teresa Boatman, Minneapolis, spoke from her perspective as a parent and parent advocate; and Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska, responded from her perspective as a researcher and leader in the field of gifted education. 

The panelists were unanimous in their praise of the effects of "A Nation Deceived" from their various perspectives.  A large audience attended and was very enthusiastic.

6) What do you see as the impact of your "Nation Deceived" report?

The hope was that it would minimize the disconnect between research and practice and start a new conversation about acceleration and gifted students.  I think the report is meeting both of those goals.  My main goal was that the report would eventually lead to policy changes in schools.   

7) Given the apparent results, what should parents of gifted kids be doing to help their kids?

I recommend that parents read the report and become versed in its findings.  If a son or daughter seems ready to benefit by acceleration, then use the report as a basis for discussion and decision-making. 

8) Can we access the results of your three year study on line? Or how can we get a copy?

The report and the survey results can be accessed at www.nationdeceived.org 

9) What question have I neglected to ask? What is next?

A direct outgrowth of the success of " A Nation Deceived" has been the funding by the John Templeton Foundation of the Institute for Research and Policy on Acceleration (IRPA).  IRPA is a part of the Belin-Blank Center and it's research director is Professor David Lohman, a highly respected scholar in the field.  IRPA provides consultation, policy guidelines, and research.  All services of IRPA are free.  (www.accelerationinstitute.org)

Published January 21, 2008