Last month, Senator Jason Frerichs (D-1/Wilmot) said he wanted to introduce a “stay in South Dakota” requirement for the Opportunity Scholarship, the $6,500 we offer “South Dakota’s most academically accomplished high school graduates” to study at our South Dakota institutions, public and private, of higher learning.
Senator Frerichs has formalized his proposal in Senate Bill 132. However, instead of adding a Northern Exposure requirement for the academic go-getters who currently qualify for the scholarship, Senator Frerichs would expand the Opportunity Scholarship to include a new class of go-get-not-quite-as-muchers who would make the stay-here promise.
Right now, the Opportunity Scholarship has five requirements:
- Have South Dakota residency;
- Score 24 or better on the ACT (or equivalently good SAT);
- Pass a bunch of high school classes prescribed by the Regents;
- Go to college or vo-tech in South Dakota
- Enroll within five years of high school graduation or one year of leaving active military service.
SB 132 leaves those requirements untouched. Meet them, take the Opportunity Scholarship, and you’re still free to go wherever you want after graduation.
SB 132 creates an exception for Criterion #2. Score only a 22 or 23 on the ACT, and SB 132 will still give you an Opportunity Scholarship… if you promise to reside in South Dakota for five years after you get your degree.
$6,500 for five years. $1,300 for each year.
If you’re already planning to stay, that’s great—it’s free money! Take it!
But if you’re a rational job-seeker with no emotional geographical attachments, I’m willing to bet (based on the state’s own economic data) that you can find work in numerous other states that would give you more than $1,300 a year more in additional purchasing power than comparable positions in South Dakota.
So I would question whether $6,500 for five years of sacrificed out-of-state earning power will be enough to sway anyone not already persuaded to stay in our great state.
I would also question whether expanding the scholarship to students scoring less than 24 on the ACT can satisfy the purpose of the program. Remember, it’s not just guidance counselor brochures by statute that says the Opportunity Scholarship is for our “most accomplished” students. 22 on the ACT is actually a snudge under the 2016 statewide average ACT score of 22.02. If test scores mean anything (open debate!), then giving this scholarship to more students whose accomplishment is closer to average than superlative seems to drift from the original purpose of the scholarship.
But Senate Education, which hears SB 132 tomorrow (Tuesday!) morning at 7:45, likely won’t go that deep into the bill. They’ll see that SB 132 would expand the Opportunity Scholarship, thus requiring more money, and with a quick glance at today’s revenue projections—kablooie!—41st day.
As I said last month, I can see the logic of tit-for-tat in scholarships: we give you money, you stay and help South Dakota. But in the case of college students, I’d say that getting them to stay here for four years of college instead of leaving right away for their education already brings our college communities and the state in general enough economic benefits, especially given that the Opportunity Scholarship is far from a full-ride. If we really want to induce more of our best and brightest to stay in South Dakota for their careers, we have to go bigger: offer a bigger scholarship, better wages, and a better cultural climate that welcomes intellect and diversity.
We do not need a lot more college grads. Yes, I am for education but not more than reasonable since it costs a lot of money. I think that we should put the guidelines at ACT score of 25 for college scholarships and ACT score of 19 for votech schools. We do need more votech grads and the kids that did not do great in high school but do have potential should feel needed and get help if necessary.
If we are going to be ready for those manufacturing jobs that trump is going to get back we need a workforce that is capable of doing those jobs.
We need more vo-tech graduates, but we also need more college grads to compete in the global economy, to generate new companies that diversify the tax base, and to provide new capabilities to existing companies.
Remember, most of the world’s population, and therefore most of the world’s consumers, lie outside of the United States. They are growing faster than the U.S. population is.
A better approach may be to require or promote an internship with a South Dakota company, and include some mechanism for encouraging SD companies to participate.
That way students and SD companies get to know each other, and the probability of staying on as an employee (and therefore in SD) likely would increase. You can’t promise employment however.
Also, there are many majors that would actually benefit SD companies more, but some are not traditionally recruited by HR in a given company.
Jason Frerichs looks like one of them well-scrubbed blue-eyed blond “christian” rockers.
I like Sen. Frerichs, he’s a good man. The Democrat party needs more like him.
If this guy was a Dem wingnuts would crucify him and say everyone gets a participation ribbon.
Mr. Mike, I realize you are from Iowa and Mr. Frerichs is from near ND and MN, but he is a Democrat. A very young, and almost pretty fellow, albeit a former heavyweight leg wrestler from what I am told.
He is probably one of the saner Democrats in the legislatures.
I agree Cory. I think his heart is in the right spot, but it’s maybe a bit unnecessary. Maybe some of this money should be redirected to young people who choose to take a job in South Dakota? Or a smaller lump sum if you take a job in SD at the end of your college career?
Grudz- I know you are from somewhere, not sure if it inhabited by humans, but I did not post that comment. That was my evil twin bro who thinks he is a wingnut- Ike from Miowa. He pops up in the damndest places to sully my sterling reputation. Now go drown yer sorrows in gravy.
Chip—a state hiring bonus? Show Pierre a South Dakota post-secondary diploma and a new job contract putting you to work in SD, and the Governor writes you a $2,000 check from the Future Fund. Come back in 12 months and show the Governor 12 months of pay stubs and a renewed contract, and the Governor writes you a $4,000 check. Instead of money up front and then hopes that you pan out, we pay the money once you show us you’re staying. Any takers?
We pay the tuition costs for physicians who stay and practice in rural South Dakota. I believe we do the same for lawyers practicing in rural locations.
Why not make the promise scholarship universal – a promise to ease education burdens in exchange for the promise to stay in South Dakota for 5 years. If we double the state commitment, and the commitment to stay in SD for 10 years, would that help retain more college educated?
The crappy part for me is the promise scholarship disappeared because I received external scholarships. Talk about a disincentive. If I didn’t receive more scholarships than the Promise fund, it was a total waste of time & effort to apply.