The term “acceleration” has been popping up a lot of late in the education press. “High dosage tutoring” is cited as a possible key to “accelerating” student learning to make up for losses suffered during the pandemic. Some states have made block grants for acceleration available to K-12 schools. “Acceleration academies” are being developed. In other states, parents worry about the possible elimination of accelerated math programs.
So what gives? What exactly is acceleration? Do accelerated programs for high-achieving students actually work? What about accelerated programs as a way to make up for the lack of in-person learning during COVID-19? How does acceleration impact equity?
What Is Acceleration?
As these questions suggest, acceleration doesn’t mean any one thing. It refers to general attempts to maximize learning at pace among different student populations. There are at least two relevant kinds of acceleration: one that accelerates high-achieving students who are ready for more challenging material than that offered by a standard curriculum, and another that accelerates the learning of those students who’ve had learning “decelerated” by a disruption to their education like COVID.
Below we discuss these two concepts of acceleration in turn, discuss the research behind each approach, and look forward to the prospects for accelerated learning in the coming school year.
Acceleration for High-Achieving and “Gifted” Students
The idea of tracking higher-achieving or gifted students into accelerated programs has been in existence for a long time. It is natural to think that high-achieving students will do better when they’re challenged, and to worry that they may disengage otherwise.
Obviously, there are a number of different ways to accelerate high-achieving students. The main approaches are as follows: (1) acceleration through enrichment activities or differentiated instruction without changing classes, (2) acceleration through separate classes for particular subject matter in which the student is gifted, and (3) acceleration by simply advancing the student to the next grade.
Generally, there is good research grounding for acceleration of this kind, with some important caveats. A large meta-analysis, conducted in 2016, found that acceleration that groups students by ability has a positive impact on student learning. The study found that “within-class groupings,” where students are put into small, differentiated groups depending on progress, led to at least some gains in learning. Interestingly, this was true for students from both high-, medium-, and low-achieving populations. Specialized gifted programs, as well as “cross-grade” groupings, where students from different grades are grouped into classes by ability, also show statistically significant learning gains.
By contrast, the study found no evidence for the efficacy of “between-class groupings,” where students from the same grade are separated into completely different classes based on demonstrated ability. In general, acceleration through differentiated instruction while keeping students in the same class seems to be the best approach.
Acceleration has historically raised a lot of concerns about socialization. Some parents and educators worry that accelerated programs will isolate students socially, or put them into awkward social situations with older students. Given that high-achieving students sometimes tend to deal with some social challenges already, these concerns can be even more pressing.
Although the evidence on this point is limited, it should at least partially alleviate these worries. One paper suggests students don’t generally consider experience in gifted programs to be a barrier to forming relationships. Furthermore, a twenty-year longitudinal study conducted in Australia found talented students who were accelerated experienced more satisfaction and were, in general, better adjusted compared to similar students who were not accelerated.
Another question is who exactly should be accelerated? Some acceleration programs have focused on students who are high-achieving in the classroom; others identify “gifted and talented” students through testing. These latter students may not exhibit classroom performance that matches their test scores.
Research here is also unfortunately thin, but studies that make the distinction between high performers and “gifted and talented” ones tend to show that the former benefit more from acceleration than the latter. This makes sense. Although gifted students should certainly be given an opportunity to excel, their lack of performance can be due to several factors. Depending on what the underlying reasons are, they may benefit from remaining on a standard track until their performance improves to meet their potential. Overall, in-class performance seems a more reliable way to identify candidates for acceleration than standardized testing.
The best practice here seems to be to accelerate students when possible, but to be as attentive to context as possible when doing so. This means focusing on the individual student needs and performance in particular areas.
A student who performs well in math shouldn’t be accelerated across the board. Indeed, simply grouping students into accelerated versus non-accelerated categories — or advancing high-performing students a whole grade level — seems to be the least effective approach. Rather, differentiation within classes, and specialized subject-matter programs for high-achieving students seem to work best.
In brief, focused acceleration beats generalized acceleration.
Obviously, there are a number of different ways to accelerate high-achieving students. The main approaches are as follows: (1) acceleration through enrichment activities or differentiated instruction without changing classes, (2) acceleration through separate classes for particular subject matter in which the student is gifted, and (3) acceleration by simply advancing the student to the next grade.
Acceleration for the “COVID Slide”
Obviously, acceleration in the post-pandemic discussion is focused on a different issue: getting a large number of students back on track, rather than making sure advanced students are properly challenged. Unfortunately, given the unprecedented nature of the pandemic and its impact on education, research cannot offer as much definitive evidence or guidance. That said, some lessons from acceleration for high-achieving students may apply, especially the need to focus on context.
Before looking at some of the possibilities for acceleration, let’s briefly consider the more typical solution for students who’ve fallen behind: holding them back.
Obviously, there are lots of important differences between pandemic learning loss and the more typical kind of remedial students. The students who haven’t been learning over the last year aren’t at all responsible for their lack of progress. The success of distance learning depends on many factors, including school quality, family situation, and socio-economic background. Many students from disadvantaged backgrounds haven’t been in school at all over the last year.
What’s more, the research on holding students back is not promising. Typically, students who are held back do improve in the very short-term: their performance improves for the grade they’re repeating. But in the long-run students who are held back experience “negative academic and social consequences.” Being held back creates a social stigma and is immensely stressful for students. One study suggests that, “by the time children are in sixth grade, they fear only going blind and losing a parent more than academic retention.” Large-scale retention policies can also put serious burdens on schools, leading to increased costs and class sizes.
Widespread retention, therefore, simply isn’t a good or realistic alternative to acceleration. It would punish students and overburden school districts. In their acceleration guides, both the Teaching Lab and The New Teacher Project caution against an approach to remediation that emphasizes material from prior grades. This can permanently put students behind, and is an approach that tends to disproportionately affect low-income students, students of color, and ELL students.
So, what form should acceleration take?
Perhaps the closest researched analogue to the current situation are student-wide acceleration programs — like those meant to introduce all students to algebra earlier than high school. These programs have sought to get a number of students up to speed at once, without making fine-grained distinctions between different levels of previous achievement.
These algebra programs have had mixed success. Some reports suggest positive outcomes for all students, or at least long-term benefits on average, while other research suggests long-term deficits as students missed out on strong foundations that went missing with acceleration that was too fast. Accelerated elementary reading programs are also somewhat common, and have likewise shown signs of success.
The most successful programs seem to pay attention to context, identifying precisely the goals of the acceleration and the appropriate means for achieving them. For example, 8th-grade algebra programs that focus on “socializing” students into higher-level mathematical challenges and thinking by introducing algebraic concepts, instead of just focusing on content acquisition. This socialization seems to make students more likely to succeed in high-school math courses.
Perhaps the closest researched analogue to the current situation are student-wide acceleration programs — like those meant to introduce all students to algebra earlier than high school. These programs have sought to get a number of students up to speed at once, without making fine-grained distinctions between different levels of previous achievement.
A Flexible Approach to Acceleration
As schools turn to the goal of remediating learning loss, a focused, flexible approach is best. Acceleration shouldn’t mean simply overloading students. Aside from simply holding large numbers of students back, the biggest mistake schools can make is to simply think they can make up for learning loss by going through more material faster than in previous years.
Students will be coming back to school in the fall with various different experiences and needs. Some will have missed many classes and have learned little in the last year; others will have managed to learn a great deal, through a combination of online classes, independent learning, and perhaps summer school.
The best acceleration programs will be able to accommodate all different types of students with variegated instruction and support. The aim is to make sure all students have the skills they need to succeed and meet the objectives at the current grade level.
For some students, this might necessitate focused, one-on-one tutoring to get the student up to grade-level on various concepts. For others, it might involve time spent with online learning tools to use outside of class. For yet others, more small-group learning might be called for.
Unfortunately, the students who’ve fallen behind the most are likely to be ones already dealing with issues accessing a high-quality and equitable education. Extra efforts must be to give those students the opportunities they need to get back to grade level, whether that be through enhanced access to tutoring, auxiliary resources, or technology.
Finally, diagnostics will play a crucial role in determining which students need what kind of interventions. School districts must give teachers the tools and guidance to diagnose students and fit acceleration interventions to their needs.
Acceleration shouldn’t be a monolithic movement of all students forward or backward, but a flexible, “just-in-time” style mode of instruction that acknowledges differential impacts and learning needs. In this way, it should not be viewed as a burdensome project, but an exciting opportunity for teachers and students alike to learn more, not just about content, but about learning itself.
The best acceleration programs will be able to accommodate all different types of students with variegated instruction and support. The aim is to make sure all students have the skills they need to succeed and meet the objectives at the current grade level.
-Ulrich Boser