Volume 3, Number 2 / April issue 2017
Lisa E. Creecy
Enrichment versus acceleration: An examination of the literature

This paper reviews the current research regarding enrichment and acceleration. It provides a comparative and contrasting look at these two types of gifted education delivery models. Popular models are analyzed, and reviewed.
Keywords: Enrichment, acceleration, gifted education

Cite this article:
Lisa E. Creecy. Enrichment versus acceleration: An examination of the literature. Acta Scientiae et Intellectus, 3(2)2017, 18-30.


  1. Beecher, M. (2010). Schoolwide enrichment model: Challenging all children to excel. Gifted Education International, 26(2-3), 177-191.
  2. Colangelo, N., Assouline, S., & Gross, M. A Nation Deceived: How Schools Hold Back America's Brightest Students Rep. No. I at 1-67 (2004).
  3. Dare, L., & Nowicki, E. (2015, October). Conceptualizing concurrent enrollment: Why high-achieving students go for it. Gifted Child Quarterly, 59(4), 249-264. doi:10.1177/0016986215597749
  4. Davis, G.A., Rimm, S. B., & Siegle, D. (2011). Education of the gifted and talented. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
  5. De Souza Fleith, D., & Soriano de Alencar, E. M. (2010). Implementing the schoolwide enrichment model in Brazil. Gifted Education International, 26(2-3), 169-177.
  6. Feldhusen, J.F. (2003). Precocity and acceleration. Gifted Education International, 17(1), 55-58.
  7. Friedman, N. (2010). Where the rubber meets the road: A principal's perspective on the schoolwide enrichment model. Gifted Education International, 26(2-3), 201-218.
  8. Gubbins, E.J. (2010). Three rings, three enrichment activities, three decades earlier. Gifted Education International, 26(2-3), 157-168.
  9. Houghton, C. (2014, January). Capturing the pupil voice of secondary gifted and talented students who had attended an enrichment programme in their infant school. Gifted Education International, 30(1), 33-46. doi:10.1177/0261429413480421
  10. Kim, M. (2016, April). A meta-analysis of the effects of enrichment programs on gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(2), 102-116. doi:10.1177/0016986216630607
  11. Lynch, S.J. (2009). Should gifted students be grade-advanced.
  12. McClarty, K.L. (2015, January). Life in the fast lane: Effects of early grade acceleration on high school and college outcomes. Gifted Child Quarterly, 59(1), 3-13. doi:10.1177/0016986214559595
  13. Olthouse, J.M. (2015, May). Improving rural teachers' attitudes towards acceleration. Gifted Education International, 31(2), 154-161. doi:10.1177/0261429413507177
  14. Shaughnessy, M.F., & Waggoner, C. (2015). How rich is your enrichment program? Creative Education, 6,663-668.
  15. Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Moon, S.M. (2011, January). The effects of acceleration on high-ability learners: A meta-analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(1), 39-53. doi:10.1177/0016986210383155
  16. Technical Assistance Manual for Gifted Education in New Mexico. Doc. at 11-130 (2008).
  17. Renzulli, J.S., & Reis, S.M. (2012, January). A virtual learning application of the schoolwide enrichment model and high-end learning theory. Gifted Education International, 28(1), 19-40. doi:10.1177/0261429411424382
  18. Renzulli, J.S., & Renzulli, S.R. (2010). The schoolwide enrichment model: A focus on student strengths and interests. Gifted Education International, 26(2-3), 140-157.
  19. Warwick, I. (2001). Providing for under-achieving students using Renzulli's type III enrichment activities: Gifted and talented video projects at Holland Park comprehensive school. Gifted Education International, 16(1), 29-42.
  20. Young-Lee, S., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Peternel, G. (2010, July). The efficacy of academic acceleration for gifted minority students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 54(3), 189-208. doi:10.1177/0016986210369256