To me, this article reads like yet another attempted justification for more federal funds - this time for the “poor, neglected gifted” children. (lol)
There are honors classes, advanced placement classes, college courses open to high school students, etc. If a student is so ahead of the class that even those special classes do not adequately meet his or her educational needs, the student should just go to college. That seems like a solution to the problem.
For the record, one of my sons scored in the top 1% on the SAT. No federal funds were necessary to meet his needs. He didn’t even go to school, with the exception of a few math courses at a local college, and is mostly self-taught. His whole curriculum consisted largely of used books, discounted books, free books, borrowed books, and me driving him to activities. Sure, I would’ve liked to have been able to afford more for him, but he had to be content with what we as a family could manage. Should the rest of you have been made to foot the bill?
I agree that most of that is true in most locations, but primarily at the high school level, which is a lot more individualized and self-directed than lower grades in the first place. In my experience there is often far less done for gifted K-6 kids, and to some degree junior high as well.
You have to take into consideration that kids are influenced by their parents and their parents are the ones footing the bills. IF the parents of kids refuse to let the kid go to early college or discourage them (my experience), not much will happen no matter how good the opportunities.
As for the schools, the schools refuse to let students do better or be seen as better, so realistically, to be able to take college courses early and not have a school undermine that then dropping out would be good, but realistically it looks bad on the permanent record.