Every year, students return to school already knowing much of the grade-level material that will be taught in their classrooms. Research shows that in a typical fifth-grade classroom, as many as half the students are working at least a year ahead in reading, more than a third are advanced in math, and some are working several years above grade level (Peters et al., 2017; Rambo-Hernandez et al., 2024). When instruction does not meet their needs, these students can disengage, develop poor study habits, or even drop out of school.
Academic acceleration is one of the most effective and affordable ways to provide appropriate challenge. It matches students’ abilities with instruction at the right level and pace, instead of confining them to age-based placements. Despite more than 70 years of evidence demonstrating its effectiveness, acceleration remains underused (Guilbault & Meyer, 2024; Lupkowski et al., 2022). For administrators, the real question is whether leadership, policy, and practice are aligned to make this research-based intervention consistently and equitably available.
More Than Grade-Skipping
Grade-skipping is the most recognized form of acceleration, but it is only one among more than twenty options (Assouline et al., 2015). Students may begin kindergarten early, graduate early, or take advanced coursework through dual enrollment or Advanced Placement. Others may advance in just one subject or have their curriculum compacted to eliminate repetition. For example, in Texas, the Credit by Examination (CBE) policy allows students to earn credit for a course or skip a grade by passing an end-of-year exam. The common goal is to ensure every student learns something new every day. For some learners, moving ahead in a single subject provides sufficient challenge. For highly or profoundly gifted students, multiple or even radical forms of acceleration may be needed to keep pace with their learning (Guilbault, 2023).
What the Research Shows
Study after study confirms that acceleration works. Appropriately accelerated students outperform similar-ability peers who remain in traditional placements. They complete advanced coursework earlier, graduate at higher rates, and are more likely to earn graduate degrees. Longitudinal research shows that as adults, they achieve more in careers, innovation, and creative contributions (Steenbergen-Hu et al., 2016).
The most common objection administrators raise is concern about social or emotional harm. Studies indicate that both principals and district gifted education administrators cite these concerns as the primary reason they do not readily recommend acceleration, even though research evidence does not support these fears (Author, 2010; Shepherd et al., 2025). This finding reflects a long-standing tension between perception and data: while myths persist, decades of studies show that acceleration does not harm students socially or emotionally. In fact, many accelerated learners report higher self-esteem and better peer relationships after acceleration, often because they finally learn alongside students with similar abilities and interests.
The Role of Policy and Leadership
If the research is so positive, why isn’t acceleration more widely implemented? A key barrier is the lack of clear policy. Without written guidelines, decisions often depend on individual beliefs rather than evidence. A recent content analysis of a southern state’s district acceleration policies (Guilbault & Meyer, 2024) found that many were inconsistent, vague, or difficult for families to access. In such districts, opportunities were inequitable, and families struggled to navigate the process. By contrast, transparent policies expanded access and ensured students were evaluated fairly.
Leadership is crucial. Administrators set the tone for whether acceleration is viewed as an accepted intervention or an uncomfortable exception. As Guilbault and Kirsch (2020) note, leaders drive change by aligning vision, policy, and practice. When administrators establish clear guidelines, invest in professional learning, and communicate openly with families, acceleration becomes part of a district’s culture of equity and excellence. Leadership plays a defining role in whether practice is shaped by myths or research. Administrators who ground decisions in evidence give students the best chance to thrive.
Making Decisions That Work
Acceleration decisions should be deliberate and objective. Tools like The integrated Acceleration System (See https://accelerationsystem.org; Assouline et al., 2021) and the Iowa Acceleration Scales (3rd ed; Assouline et al., 2009) can be used to help student study teams consider academic data, social and emotional maturity, and family input. These processes bring transparency and consistency to what can otherwise feel like a subjective decision.
Implementation does not end with the decision to accelerate. Written plans, trial placements, and follow-up meetings allow schools to monitor progress and address any challenges – either academic or socio-emotional. Administrators who put formal systems in place demonstrate to staff and families that acceleration is not a shortcut or a privilege but a structured, evidence-based educational intervention.
Acceleration is Cost-Effective
Acceleration is also one of the most affordable interventions for advanced learners. Grade-skipping requires no new funding. Subject acceleration may involve scheduling flexibility or access to online coursework. Curriculum compacting can be achieved by classroom teachers with existing resources. The long-term benefits of acceleration ultimately outweigh any minimal costs. Accelerated students stay engaged, are more likely to remain in school, and more likely to achieve advanced degrees and multiple indicators of success as adults (Steenbergen-Hu et al., 2016). For many advanced learners, particularly in districts without extensive gifted and talented programming, acceleration may be the only meaningful intervention available during the regular school day.
Leading for Equity
Equity is one of the most urgent reasons administrators must prioritize acceleration. Students from underrepresented groups—including those from low-income families, culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and twice-exceptional learners—are often overlooked for acceleration, even when achievement data supports readiness (LeBeau et al., 2025). Universal screening, automatic enrollment, and data-driven processes can help identify students equitably, rather than relying primarily on teacher or parent referrals. Transparent, accessible policies, as shown in Guilbault and Meyer’s (2024) study, are critical to ensuring families from all backgrounds can understand and pursue acceleration opportunities.
Professional learning is also vital. Few administrator preparation programs include training in gifted education or acceleration (Guilbault, 2010; Shepherd et al., 2025). Districts that invest in ongoing professional learning equip leaders to make decisions based on research rather than assumptions. Sustainable change comes from leadership that commits to both equity and excellence.
Key Takeaways
Academic acceleration is not about rushing children through school. It is about making sure they are challenged and learning every day. For advanced learners, and especially for those far ahead of their grade level, acceleration is often the single most effective intervention schools can offer. Administrators hold the key. By setting clear policies, using structured decision-making, investing in professional learning, and keeping equity at the center, school leaders can ensure that acceleration is accessible, consistent, and research-driven. When administrators lead with vision and evidence, they create environments where advanced learners thrive – academically, socially, and emotionally.
Figure 1. Top 5 Things Administrators Should Know About Academic Acceleration
Recommended Resources for Administrators
Assouline S. G., Lupkowski-Shoplik A., & Douglas B. (2021). The integrated acceleration system. The University of Iowa. https://accelerationsystem.org
Guilbault, K. M. (2009). Academic acceleration in Florida elementary schools: A survey of attitudes, policies, and practices [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Central Florida. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/3878
Guilbault, K. M., & Lupkowski-Shoplik, A. (2017). Academic acceleration. NAGC Parenting for High Potential TIP Sheet. Available at https://www.accelerationinstitute.org/NAGC-TIP_Sheet-Acceleration.pdf
Lupkowski-Shoplik A., Behrens W. A., & Assouline S. G. (2018). Developing academic acceleration policies: Whole grade, early entrance, & single subject. http://www.accelerationinstitute.org/Resources/Policy_Guidelines/Developing-Academic-Acceleration-Policies.pdf
Plucker, J. A., Berg, B., & Kuwayama, H. (2024). Automatic enrollment in advanced courses: A bipartisan approach to excellence and equity in K–12 schools. Johns Hopkins University, School of Education, Institute for Education Policy. https://jscholarship. library.jhu.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/43bc8b47-7fd8-40d4- a75c-520f7ae53a4f/content
Texas Administrative Codes Related to Academic Acceleration for Advanced Learners
- Texas Code §74.24 (Updated 2019). Describes the details of Credit by Examination. Available at https://tea.texas.gov/about-tea/laws-and-rules/texas-administrative-code/19-tac-chapter-74
- TEC §42.003(c) Early Entrance to First Grade. Available at https://texas.public.law/statutes/tex._educ._code_section_48.003
- Texas First Early High School Completion Program. Available at https://tea.texas.gov/academics/graduation-information/state-graduation-requirements/texas-first-early-high-school-completion-program
References
Assouline, S. G., Colangelo, N., Lupkowski-Shoplik, A., Lipscomb, J., & Forstadt, L. (2009). Iowa acceleration scale (3rd ed.). Great Potential Press.
Assouline, S. G., Colangelo, N., VanTassel-Baska, J., & Lupkowski-Shoplik, A. (Eds.). (2015). A nation empowered: Evidence trumps the excuses holding back America’s brightest students. University of Iowa.
Guilbault, K. M. (2009). Academic acceleration in Florida elementary schools: A survey of attitudes, policies, and practices [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Central Florida. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/3878
Guilbault, K. M., & Kirsch, L. B. (2020). Administrative leadership. In J. A. Plucker & C. M. Callahan (Eds.), Critical issues and practices in gifted education: What the research says (3rd ed., pp. 23–35). Prufrock Press.
Guilbault, K. M., & Meyer, M. S. (2024). Toward equity and transparency: A content analysis of Florida elementary acceleration policies. Gifted Child Quarterly, 68(4), 316–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862241265101
Guilbault, K. M. (2023). Academic acceleration. In T. Neal (Ed.), Strategies and considerations for educating the academically gifted (pp. 74- 94). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-6677-3.ch005
LeBeau, B., Assouline, S. G., Foley-Nicpon, M., Lupkowski-Shoplik, A., & Schabilion, K. (2025). Likelihood of whole-grade or subject acceleration for twice-exceptional students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 69(3), 237-254. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862241302813
Lupkowski-Shoplik, A., Assouline, S. G., & Lange, R. (2022). Whole-grade acceleration: From student to policy. Gifted Child Today, 45(3), 143–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175221091856
Peters, S. J., Rambo-Hernandez, K., Makel, M. C., Matthews, M. S., & Plucker, J. A. (2017). Should millions of students take a gap year? Large numbers of students start the school year above grade level. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(3), 229-238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217701834
Rambo-Hernandez, K. E., Makel, M. C., & Koehler, N. (2024). Millions of students are (still) above grade level: Achievement and achievement variability in mathematics and reading before and during COVID-19 in the United States. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 47(4), 385-409. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532241277840
Sheppard, A., Cross, T. L., & Yelshibayev, A. (2025). Knowledge, perceptions, and beliefs of elementary principals regarding whole-grade acceleration for gifted students. Roeper Review, 47(3), 158–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2025.2506985
Steenbergen-Hu, S., Makel, M. C., & Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2016). What one hundred years of research says about the effects of ability grouping and acceleration on K–12 students’ academic achievement: Findings of two second-order meta-analyses. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 849–899. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316675417
