{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017363851617995266, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0023677979479084454, 'mean_word_length': 5.780748663101604, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Practitioner Objections to the Academic Acceleration of Gifted Children

Despite extensive recent reviews that fail to document harm from early admission and acceleration, many school districts are still reluctant to employ such educational techniques. This paper reports the results of a large, mailed survey of attitudes toward these practices as reported by coordinators of gifted, school psychologists, principals, and teachers (554 respondents) and a follow-up study that explored the origin of such attitudes. The major concern of all groups is the potential for harm to the social and emotional development of accelerants, though coordinators of programs for gifted and talented show significantly more positive views toward early admission and acceleration along every dimension. Personal experience (self or family member) with acceleration was most highly related to positive attitude toward the practice. Respondents viewed early admission and grade skipping as identical. This view, coupled with the prevalence of citations by practitioners of inadequately designed and inappropriately applied "early admission studies," presents an impediment to employment of any acceleration options. Implications for researchers and leaders in the field are discussed.