After a lengthy debate on the potential merits and downfalls of the program, the Idaho House voted 61-7 in support of a pilot project that could allow high school students to graduate up to three years ahead of schedule. Students who take part in the program would also receive a scholarship for use at Idaho’s public colleges of universities upon successful early graduation.
The plan from Reps. Steven Thayn, R-Emmett, and Branden Durst, D-Boise, is designed, according to Thayn, to save money while simultaneously improving education. If implemented, the Mastery Advancement Pilot Project (MAPP) directs the Idaho Department of Education, in coordination with local school officials and teachers, to develop exams that could be used to measure students’ aptitude. For grades K-6, tests would be skill based and students in grades 7-12 would face knowledge-based exams. If students complete the exams successfully, they would be allowed to move to the next grade (for K-6 students), or to a higher course level (for grades 7-12).
If students move through work and exams quickly and graduate early, they would receive a portion of what the state would have paid to educate them their senior year in the form of a scholarship. Thayn estimates the scholarship could be worth as much as $1,600 for each school year graduated early, though costs could vary from district to district. Students would only be allowed to graduate three years early.
If approved by the Senate, the legislation would only create a pilot project to include 21 school districts and three charter schools for participation. Following a six-year period of implementation, legislators would work with the education department to evaluate the program’s effectiveness.
Thayn took his time on the House floor Monday to address concerns about the program. He said it’s likely that no teachers would lose their jobs as a result of the plan because the bill would enable teachers with graduate degrees to teach concurrent enrollment classes at the high school, which Thayn believes would see higher numbers under the program. He also agreed with critics that not many people want to see 16-year-olds who have graduated high school to leave home and go to a university for further education. He said that MAPP encourages students to experience the unique social opportunities of high school – prom, sports, music programs – while allowing the student to be enrolled in college courses at the school.
Despite Thayn’s assurances, the bill had detractors in the House. Rep. Shirley Ringo, D-Moscow, a former calculus teacher, said that the program could lead to rushed learning, which would be detrimental to education in the state. “The rapid pace might shortchange learning and understanding,” said Ringo. She said the students are enabled by the system in place at schools to graduate early if they take initiative. Rep. George Sayler, D-Coeur d’Alene, echoed Ringo, saying that the end-of-course assessments might not be as thorough as they should be.
Assistant Majority Leader Scott Bedke, R-Oakley, said he is concerned with possible fluctuations in the cost of the program, but he would lend his support to the proposal as a pilot project to allow the state to measure results.
Rep. Grant Burgoyne, D-Boise, said that the state faces a serious problem in transitioning students from high school to college and the MAPP program is a good idea to aid in that process. He applauded Thayn and Durst for writing the legislation in a manner that would allow the Idaho Department of Education to have some flexibility in determining specific requirements for the program.
“We have got to pursue some innovation if we are going to solve the problems,” said Burgoyne.
The bill now heads to the Senate for consideration. Thayn told IdahoReporter.com he expects a tougher battle there, but he remains optimistic about MAPP’s passage.
I work with 9th and 10th graders. Many of them have difficulty turning work in on time, following directions, communicating clearly, and writing. They are not well prepared for high school. Are we going to water down education some more but now at the college level? So it comes down to let’s save some money. Let’s state loud and clear what value the state of Idaho places on our current educational state of affairs and the degree to which we value the system that is currently in place. Instead of making up wacky, knee jerk, quick fix solutions, let’s look at what we would like our graduates to look like as an end product.
How about rewarding students who maintain a 3.0 in high school by providing a dual enrollment incentive. If the highschool student has a 3.0 or better, the state and college(especially community colleges) could split the cost of the students tuition so the student only has to pay for books and supplies. The high school student could take college classes and apply them to their graduation requirements for high school graduation while also moving ahead and saving money. Back in the early 80′s Miami Dade Community College (FL) had an incentive program (it was called dual enrollment). Students that maintained a 3.0 or better could take college courses from MDCC at night and the courses were free to the high school student. I graduated from high school with 18 credits toward my AA degree. These were classes I had taken from MDCC during high school in my junior and senior years. It was GREAT incentive and it required hard work. Nothing was watered down. Most of the students I’ve encountered are not prepared to enter into a post secondary setting and I believe you have two different things happening here 1. saving money, 2. lowering the value of education and the outcome. It is certainly not raising the bar.
Beware of future lawsuits! If a child were to go through a pilot program such as this and end up unable to graduate/succeed/complete the program because he did not have the maturity to finish the program and the parent had spent $25,000.00 of their own money beyond the scholarship money extended by the state…. yes there are people who think this way believe it or not….the state my be held accountable for that students failure and owe the parents some money. Just something to think about.
I am a high school student who is graduating a year early. I have an average of a 3.8 GPA and am attempting to go off to college and start my higher education as soon as possible. I am an honors student, have taken and passed duel credit courses. However, going off to college is difficult for me at any age. My job isn’t high paying and my family isn’t very wealthy. In my case, and in the case of 3 other honor students also graduating early from my high school, this would be an advantage.
Graduating early is not an easy process. I am required to take 2x as many difficult required classes than other juniors. Any student who attempts to graduate early and succeeds will be ready for the challenges of college. With that said, this scholarship will only go toward those who deserve it.