Alright. First of all. The world doesn't revolve around you and nobody really cares that you do a bit more than 'average'. This world doesn't care about that. As far as efficiency and output of high class education is concerned, then your system is a waste of money. Also, the system does let people who are exceptionally ahead to skip grades. Like I did when I was in 6th grade. And for high school, there are always ways to graduate early. You can prove yourself to be way ahead by doing so.
But frankly, the world won't care that you graduated early. They only care if you scored in the 0.1% of all your nation's concurrent peers.
simply because of the cost of technology is stupid at best.
Not simply because of the cost of technology. If you were the least bit smart, you would've considered what comes before and after.
You claim it to be a flawed idea, but you haven't actually attacked it. You just say it is impractical, and thus bad. When there are aspects of it rooted in science, such as a rewards system that works for a fact and hardly requires that much extra money. To toss out the entire idea and call it flawed simply because of the cost of technology is stupid at best. At least explore the possibility of a single class like it instead of ruling it out entirely.
But what of the actual functionality of it? I'm not expecting it to be perfect, or even close. I know there are flaws, as there are flaws with everything. At least I'm bloody trying to fix a broken system. You have any better ideas?
For a system to work well, there must be an adequate output compared to the input you put in. For your system, there probably will be inconceivable amounts of input required. The only practicality I see with your system would probably work only under special circumstances, such as specialized high schools- for the gifted. But that's not the point. We see the efficiency of a system by comparing input and output. Currently, the way I see your system is not only impractical, but impossible to generalize among the entire Americas. And with costs that high, and without much proof that your system will bring 'much better results', one would be skeptical at best.
I'm sorry, but schools are struggling financially, and there are tons not receiving enough federal funds. Did you get it into your head that impractical goes out the window no matter how appeasing it sounds? Did you really think the government will cut down on military funds for a system, one would be skeptical about at best? Also, if you're blabbering about science, then provide hard facts from a reliable source. Not from some shoddy old news site. I thought you were smarter than that. Until then, I will consider it a pseudo-science, rooted within words, not actual science. Also, even if that were true, I'm skeptical about how dramatic a change some rewards can bring to hopeless kids, and how much it will be effective when tested among large masses.
Not only that, your system involves gadgets of undoubtedly high price for each individual. To provide is impossible. To buy is only for those capable. Even if a school could provide, I wouldn't be surprised if many were vandalized or stolen. Not only would schools require to replace their pricey gadgets annually, they would also need to maintain conditions of their current stock. Some systems only work when certain conditions are met.
Anyways, as I've said. Your system might work, if it were for specialized high schools. But I don't see much necessity in that either. Because students of specialized high schools generally don't require more education. More so, nearly half of them graduate high school early.
Here's my solution.
It would be much more simple and less costly then your impractical. Providing a nationalized curriculum for each grade, in orders teachers must follow. Most systems would still be standardized, except for specialized high schools, such as schools of science. That way, students and teachers alike can know easily what they will learn in what year and so on. There would be a national education ad department that provides information.
Then, for each starting year, everyone has to take a 'National Scholastic Evaluation Test 'Grade X''. One would have to score exceptionally high for all their mandatory subjects. The grading would not be based on one's score, but rather their relative score to their peers. For example, Grade A would be top 4% of the nation, Grade B would be 4% to 15%, with the largest percentile gap for C until grade F. Or it would be better to make more grading sections and grade numerically instead of alphabetically.
Then, providing an standardized acceleration system to those who scored all As in the tested subjects would get to skip a grade. But they will only be able to skip one grade each year.
Anyone who wants to get ahead could actually do something real to get ahead. Not only would they have to study, because they'd be competing with the highest and brightest of students, but because they'd have to score all As on every single subject on the Evaluations test. It would probably be Language, Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies for grades 1 through 8, and for high schools, Language, Mathematics, and two subjects of choice.
Of course, the fastest anyone could complete standard education from Elementary to High is within 6 years with this acceleration program. But that's still pretty damn fast. I doubt anyone would be able to do that. Plus if people failed to advance, then that's not really anyone else' problem.
None.