Lots of people sharing stories about how fortunate they were to be saved from bullying and chaos. I can relate, since I switched schools myself to get away fro

Lots of people sharing stories about how fortunate they were to be saved from bullying and chaos. I can relate, since I switched schools myself to get away from bullying (though to a Waldorf school rather than any kind of gifted program). But have you stopped to think, if this study is correct, then some of the following seems like they must be true: * you would actually have done as well if you stayed * you would have done worse if you stayed, but others who went into gifted programs would have done better if they didn't, making up for it * people like you are just too rare to make a difference in the statistics. My older brother wasn't actively bullied, but was in an infamously dysfunctional class. He just filtered them out somehow, never changed school, and did far better than me academically in the end. So maybe an anecdotal data point for the first option. There are other things besides achievement. I can certainly see an argument for separating kids who actively hurt other kids, whether it matters for achievement or not. But it seems giving high scoring kids extra stimulating environments isn't all it's cracked up to be (If the study can be believed).