The main benefit of ML to average/gifted students is long-term, and would indeed not show up in a formal experiment involving a simple "class". Namely, expecting the student to achieve mastery averts problems with educational "gaps" further along the curriculum; and letting the student learn at their optimal pace can help them learn the existing material faster or in more depth, which benefit also compounds throughout a full curriculum.
DI as a method includes a "90% of all taught material must be review" rule which while helpful for the less proficient students who are the main focus of the method, is probably overkill even for an average student let alone a gifted one.[0] What's more relevant is that instruction should be as unambiguous as possible and that the mastery-learning principle should be followed.
[0] It's also a plausible factor behind the common complaint that DI involves less "creativity, joy and spontaneity" than more popular and commonplace educational methods. This plausibly reflects the outlook of above-average students, but likely not of less proficient ones, for whom 'review' and a tight feedback loop is very helpful indeed!
DI as a method includes a "90% of all taught material must be review" rule which while helpful for the less proficient students who are the main focus of the method, is probably overkill even for an average student let alone a gifted one.[0] What's more relevant is that instruction should be as unambiguous as possible and that the mastery-learning principle should be followed.
[0] It's also a plausible factor behind the common complaint that DI involves less "creativity, joy and spontaneity" than more popular and commonplace educational methods. This plausibly reflects the outlook of above-average students, but likely not of less proficient ones, for whom 'review' and a tight feedback loop is very helpful indeed!