This is a very interesting summary of research on learning of gifted students:

http://www.nswagtc.org.au/info/articles/RogersResearchSynthesis.html


or via tinyurl at:

http://tinyurl.com/2hcxjr

It answered my question on the rate of learning. I've pasted just a small amount below:

Research on Instructional Delivery: Pacing, Process Modifications

* The learning rate of children above 130 IQ is approximately 8 times faster than for children below 70 IQ
* Gifted students are significantly more likely to retain science and mathematics content accurately when taught 2-3 times faster than "normal" class pace.
* Gifted students are significantly more likely to forget or mislearn science and mathematics content when they must drill and review it more than 2-3 times
* Gifted students are decontextualists in their processing, rather than constructivists; therefore it is difficult to reconstruct "how" they came to an answer.

Thanks to Hoagies for the link!

Wow Bk1 - you found it! the controversial mislearn through repitition link! I'll dive in later today, but for now, ((thumbs up))
Grin

Great work BK! It does seem odd though, and as a mathy person myself, I'm trying to get my mind around the "mislearning" idea. I'll have to read more indepth after the busses.

Yes, bk1, I posted something about this and was warned off it, though I still maintain that it makes sense to me...Kids daydreaming because they're bored start playing with the numbers and *poof* the material gets mixed up in their heads.

I'd still love to see evidence that this is flawed. I accept that it may be, but I hate to give such useful statistics up without a fight!

This is really interesting to me. Dd's 2nd grade class has been working on math facts to 20 for what seems like forever now. They do these drills and have to get 20 or 30 number problems correct within a certain time frame to move on to the next level. Initially dd was passing these easily but as time went on the % of ones she was passing declined, almost like she was getting worse. Anyway, when we got home we tried flash cards to help. Very quickly she started to rattle off the answers correctly. No mistakes and certainly quick enough to pass her test.

If I sit down with her and work on math she learns concepts very quickly (especially more advanced math) but when I see her doing math in school it seems that the repetition makes her worse. I really couldn't understand how she wasn't passing these rather simple math tests and yet she could come home and easily understand math concepts way beyond what they're doing in class. I thought I was losing my mind but maybe it makes more sense now?

I think I remember mislearning things when they got boring. I just tried to make everything a little harder than it needed to be in order to keep my brain engaged. In the process of doing that sometimes it got twisted up. I'll try to think of an example....

You know, that was totally me in elementary math. It was like it was so easy I spent a lot of time making it hard in my head. I did really mediocre in math in elementary school. Not to mention there was just this sub culture of "girls don't do math" at my small catholic school, nor was there was there anything resembling GT prgramming or identification there.

And I went on to get BS degrees in math and comp sci. I loved math once I got to algebra!

Yes-- I have to say I like it because it supports my push for less repetition and test prep. The Ruf summary I link to doesn't give any info on the research backing it.

bk

Hey, good job finding that bk1!

I don't dislike the findings, I just like to know more background for statistics. The link you found gives enough information to track down her original article, which must cite the research studies she used for her analysis. It's not so important to me that I'm going to go to the stacks and look for the symposium proceedings...unless I get really bored... There are lots of interesting statements in that summary though. One bit I found startling is near the end, in the section about standards, that US educators aim content at the 19th percentile! That's so low.

Thinking about the mislearning/forgetting science or math when must drill or review more than 2-3 times - I'm aware that I sometimes decide something isn't worth remembering if it's been repeated a lot. I figure it'll just be repeated again in the future and I can catch it when I need it.

Oh, and I also totally changed my opinion of math when I got to algebra. I think I just read something that indicated this was fairly common for women/girls...will see if I can find.

I know that the connection seems intuitivly appealing, but look at the very way the question is posed. It's so general.

Do I believe a child should be held back from learning algebra because they can't beat the time on a worksheet of simple multiplication fact? NO.

Do I believe a child should continue to drill, after they have demonstrated mastery, because the other children still need drill? No.

Do I believe that the weight of experience shows that many gifted children can learn Math much faster than most people imagined? Yes.

I believe that each child should be taught at their readiness, AND that memory readiness for math facts shouldn't limit math concept readiness for math ideas.

But that isn't the same as saying that controlled studies have been done.

Why do I make a big deal over it?

Because there are times when a child will need lots and lots of drill. Music, Language, Handwriting, and Math Facts should continue to be engaged with at the child's readiness level, even when the child is soaring ahead with the conceptual. I want our children, each of whom is an individual, with individual learning needs to be seen, noticed, and thought about as an individual learner.

An Example:
My DS loves to learn musical instruments, and it's clear that he progresses much much faster than other kids his age, or really, any age. I even say that 15 minutes of DS practice is equal to 30 minutes of regular practice. But there does come a point where he really really just has to sit down and practice. He sometimes gets in trouble during performances from underpreperation - I've seen it happen.

((shrugs))
Grinty

Hi Grinity:

I agree with you on all of the above regarding when repetition is necessary.

Thanks for providing the needed sourcing for the assertion re repetition.

I'm sorry I passed on this information, since there doesn't seem to be support for it in the research.

Thanks for taking the time to get this info for us.

bk

bk - appologies accepted! Belief me, it's a mistake I've made, both with passing along the info, and with applying it - We all make mistakes.

My definition of a friend, BTW,is someone who can have a lot of fun with, who loves you, who also can act like a warning bouy, showing where the hidden rocks of life are - and flash!

((Giant Grin))
Grinity