And that is ok if most of the schools and communities suffer, maybe even have to shut down?

Many would contend that when like minded students are placed in the same schools they thrive. If you have a student who is gifted in science are you not doing that student a disservice by not offering an outstanding science curriculum? The same applies to Mathmatics, Music, Art, etc.

 

Maybe, just maybe if a school is not able to survive in an open enrollment system it should look at itself and determine why parents don't want to send their kids there and improvove on their shortcoming rather then maintaining the status quo at all schools. Raise the bar rather then lowering it.

And to understand my post you need to know that I am from a school district as you mentioned. One middle school and one high school to serve the whole county. NO other choice, private or public, in our county. There are a lot of rural counties that are similar throughout this state.

If that is true then why not propose a division for small, closed enrollment schools that have the disadvantages that you are constantly describing rather then singling out the private schools? BUT, could (not do but could) your school allow students from outside the county in if they so chose? Forget any logistic difficulties and just answer, could they if they chose to. If as I suspect the answer is yes, then WHY should all schools fe force to abide by a CHOICE your school district has made?

 

If we knew who voted for what in October, I believe you would find that these type of counties are the core of those that voted FOR Prop 20. IMVHO

I disagree with this completely. Every school in Jefferson County and Fayette County voted for Prop 20.

 

As far as your post on academics, there are minimum standards that all choose. If a school wants to have higher standards, than that is their choice.

You're debating against your own point. If a schools sets limits on themselves they would be grossly unfair in expecting all other schools to abide by those limiatations and you say as much where academic standards are concerned. Yet IMVHO that is exactly what many in the public schools are trying to do to private schools regarding enrollment boundries. Why can (oe should) there be a double standard on any self-limitations?

If that is true then why not propose a division for small, closed enrollment schools that have the disadvantages that you are constantly describing rather then singling out the private schools? BUT, could (not do but could) your school allow students from outside the county in if they so chose? Forget any logistic difficulties and just answer, could they if they chose to. If as I suspect the answer is yes, then WHY should all schools fe force to abide by a CHOICE your school district has made?

 

 

I disagree with this completely. Every school in Jefferson County and Fayette County voted for Prop 20.

 

 

You're debating against your own point. If a schools sets limits on themselves they would be grossly unfair in expecting all other schools to abide by those limiatations and you say as much where academic standards are concerned. Yet IMVHO that is exactly what many in the public schools are trying to do to private schools regarding enrollment boundries. Why can (oe should) there be a double standard on any self-limitations?

1st paragraph. I have and it is somewhere in this forum. We could choose to bring in 30 foreign basketball players, 15 female and 15 male, all over 6'0" tall. Problems with us doing that? Or how about we go out of state and bring in some very talent athletes from other states. That okay to you? We could field a team in which not nary a soul calls KY home after the school year is up. That okay? If not, then you would want to have limits, just the limits that you think is okay.

 

2nd paragraph. Don't believe the two counties you listed, add up to 195 votes.

 

3rd paragraph. Difference between setting limits on yourself and removing the limits on yourself. Also, since academics is supposed to your primary objective in a school, setting standards for your primary objective is not the issue.

1st paragraph. I have and it is somewhere in this forum. We could choose to bring in 30 foreign basketball players, 15 female and 15 male, all over 6'0" tall. Problems with us doing that? Or how about we go out of state and bring in some very talent athletes from other states. That okay to you? We could field a team in which not nary a soul calls KY home after the school year is up. That okay? If not, then you would want to have limits, just the limits that you think is okay.

Go for it. If your school is attractive enough to draw students like that without illegal athletic recruiting (because ALL schools have to follow those rules), more power to you. The rest better do something to improve their image or they will be following in your dust

 

2nd paragraph. Don't believe the two counties you listed, add up to 195 votes.

Then lets add Warren, Daviess and every other county that has more then one high school. I know there are not 195 counties in Kentucky that have only 1 high school.

 

3rd paragraph. Difference between setting limits on yourself and removing the limits on yourself. Also, since academics is supposed to your primary objective in a school, setting standards for your primary objective is not the issue.

Then shouldn't EVERY school automatically jump at a chance to up their academic standards? I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen. I for one see no difference in the two.

Many would contend that when like minded students are placed in the same schools they thrive. If you have a student who is gifted in science are you not doing that student a disservice by not offering an outstanding science curriculum? The same applies to Mathmatics, Music, Art, etc.

 

Maybe, just maybe if a school is not able to survive in an open enrollment system it should look at itself and determine why parents don't want to send their kids there and improvove on their shortcoming rather then maintaining the status quo at all schools. Raise the bar rather then lowering it.

 

Well, if a child is truly "gifted", then even a public school wouldn't be good enough, would it? I can argue that if McCracken went to open enrollment and created one or two excellent public schools, those schools would be overwhemled with enrollees and wouldn't be able to handle it, while other schools around the area are forced to shut down, and would have a negative impact on those little communities. Every public school I have ever known of has accelerated classes for the smarter kids that prepares the ones that truly want to attend college, I can't see how a school that focuses on one aspect of an education is better.

 

 

Then shouldn't EVERY school automatically jump at a chance to up their academic standards? I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen. I for one see no difference in the two.

Let's don't limit it and place all the responsibility on the steps of athletics though. If athletics is going to have stricter academic guidelines, let's do it for band and chorus and drama club and ROTC and so on and so on. Let's hold ALL kids accountable and not just athletes.

Fine with me