This is something that mastery-based learning solves pretty cleanly. Or more accurately, in a MBL pedagogy, there's no need for faster/gifted or slower/remedial paths.
All the debate for/against gifted programs fall into the same trap of not thinking critically enough about the pedagogical model that powers pretty much all of our education from childhood through higher ed. IMO, we're only debating about the symptoms of a outdated pedagogical model, and not talking enough about the underlying problem -- the factory model of education.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say it's a trap. The debate is "current model + gifted programs" vs. "current model with no gifted programs", not abstract pedagogy - NYC is currently executing on that second option, and multiple other school systems have announced similar plans. I completely agree that gifted programs are a band-aid for a poorly designed school system, and in an ideal world special interventions wouldn't be required to let students learn at a faster pace, but that doesn't mean the debate on whether we should or shouldn't have the band-aid is unimportant.
All the debate for/against gifted programs fall into the same trap of not thinking critically enough about the pedagogical model that powers pretty much all of our education from childhood through higher ed. IMO, we're only debating about the symptoms of a outdated pedagogical model, and not talking enough about the underlying problem -- the factory model of education.