Idaho students could be able to graduate up to three years early from high school and earn scholarship money from the state for doing so.
Rep. Stephen Thayn, a Republican from Emmett, and Rep. Branden Durst, a Democrat from Boise, are collaborating on an education bill that could radically alter the educational system in Idaho, save the state government thousands, and incentivize students to become more involved in their own education. The two legislators want to create a pilot project that would allow students in selected districts to move through school at their own pace and move up grade levels in K-6 schools and test out of classes in grade 7-12 in order to graduate early.
The Mastery Advancement Pilot Program, as it is called in the bill, would create a six year long pilot project that would test the ability of the program to operate efficiently and meet its targeted goals. Schools districts of every size from across the state would be allowed to apply to be part of the project and the Idaho State Department of Education would select twenty-one schools districts and three charter schools of various and proportional sizes to participate. Charter schools would also be allowed to apply, though only three from across the state would be accepted into the program.
For grades K-6, the Dept. of Education would create skill-based benchmark tests to be administered by each school in the pilot districts. Upon successful completion of a test, a student would receive full credit for the grade level they tested out of and would be allowed to move to the next grade. There are no specific limits on how many grades a student could skip during the “benchmark” phase.
For grades 7-12, the Dept. of Education would develop knowledge-based end-of-course-assessments called “mastery exams.” Each class or subject area would have an exam and students would be required to score at least eighty-five percent on the exams to receive completion credits. Once students test out of a class, he or she would be allowed, under the supervision and direction of the district and school, to study other subjects required for graduation. Through self-study, it is anticipated the student would have access to online high school courses and additional materials that would aid in the learning. The students would need to complete all curriculums as required by the school district, either through testing out or in-class instruction, to graduate.
Students who graduate in less than the standard thirteen years (including Kindergarten), would receive a state-funded scholarship for use only in public colleges and universities in Idaho. For each year the student graduated early he or she would receive money, in the form of a scholarship, which would equal thirty-five percent of the student’s district’s cost of educating the student. Thayn estimated the state pays approximately $2,500 a semester to educate each student, so students would receive just under $1,000 in scholarship funds.
Students who would graduate early under the program would be allowed to remain in school and participate in concurrent enrollment programs, which allow students to take college courses and earn college credit in a high school setting.
Schools would ultimately save money by having fewer students that require all thirteen years of education. It is not known at this time if any teachers would lose their jobs as a result of the reduced student levels. For each semester students would graduate early, the state would pay the district about thirty-percent of the cost to educate the student, though the student would not be enrolled in school.
Marvelous Idea! Lets go for it.
Smarter kids are being dragged down by “No chile lef behine”. This program REWARDS them for pushing themselves to get ahead.
Remember the day that Japanese parents were in the back of the class all day so THEY could push their kidlets in the evening?
OHHH, SOOOO FINE!
Jim
this program has real promise. I would just want to be sure that there is nothing in it which would deincentive the public school administration. Remember, whenever you do anything that would require less education, or fewer teachers you are going to have resistance. Ultimately, we as the voters, will have to take a stand to make this successful, otherwise the schools will make it difficult to be successful.
Jim H.,
As the plan stands right now, there would be some incentive for school districts. The draft of the legislation includes language that would give some of the savings realized by having students graduate early back to the school district. (Obviously, this is subject to change)
Also, districts would have to sign up to be in the pilot program–they wouldn’t be forced into it.
[...] previously covered the Thayn/Durst plan. Luna’s one-sentence temporary rule on mastery lets districts decide how to measure student [...]
[...] Superintendent of Public Instruction Luna told IdahoReporter.com in this video interview that he’s opened the door to let districts set up their plans to let students who show they know a subject pass early. He also said he’s interested in a plan that would give students a financial incentive to graduate early. [...]
I think this option will have various pros and cons. As a school administrator, I have seen the negative social effects of younger students placed in a classroom and school with older peers. Sometimes it works great and other times it doesn’t. There is also a problem with school districts not providing enough opportunities for higher performing student to excel, this would obviously help that scenario. The recent development with the IEN will also help this as well.
Will this option increase to the number of students who struggle socially which would eventually negatively affect society? I wonder how universities feel about this as it will directly impact them as well? I do appreciate the out of the box thinking.
[...] IdahoReporter.com was the first news agency to cover the Thayn/Durst proposal. You can read the original story from December here. [...]
[...] IdahoReporter.com was first on the story back in December; read that story here. Also, Rep. Durst had another bill successfully pass the House Monday. Read about it [...]
[...] IdahoReporter.com will continue to monitor the Legislature and will report on this legislation should it be adopted in any committees. Thayn will also have a major hearing on an education bill to radically alter the delivery of public education in Idaho. Read our story on that legislation here. [...]
[...] To read more about the Thayn/Durst MAPP proposal, please read IdahoReporter.com’s first story on it here. [...]
Is school for learning or for social interaction? I believe it’s for learning and for excelling.
Nonetheless, some think school is for social interaction too. With that same logic, schools should hold back boys a little longer then the girls, because girls socialize better and communicate better at a much earlier age than boys. In addition, I guess home schooled children are socially inept; give me a break!
When these students make their way into college or the “real world”, that’s when they finally find themselves, not in high school! School is there for education. Leave the social interaction to the students’ social life such as meeting up with friends at a movie, hanging out over yogurt, sports, or even at the family dinner table.