The proposal itself [1] claims that dividing students into classes based on ability harms, instead of improves, the gifted students' outcomes. Which raises the

The proposal itself [1] claims that dividing students into classes based on ability harms, instead of improves, the gifted students' outcomes. Which raises the question - what would improve their outcomes? Assuming that more advanced math classes help learn more advanced math, it would seem the separation itself is what does the harm. Would an entire school dedicated to gifted students avoid this harm? There are (or were [2]) such schools - it would be interesting to see if there are comparable studies on how well gifted students that attended such schools did, compared to those that did not. [1] Burris, Heubert & Levin (2006) followed students through middle schools in the district of New York. In the first three years, the students were in regular or advanced classes, in the following three years all students took the same mathematics classes comprised of advanced content. In their longitudinal study the researchers found that when all students learned together the students achieved more, took more advanced courses in high school, and passed state exams a year earlier, with achievement advantages across the achievement range, including the highest achievers (Burris, Heubert & Levin, 2006). - https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/cf/ https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/cf/ [2] https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/S-F-school-board-strips-Lowell-High-of-its-15938565.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/S-F-school-board...