I was not involved in that decision so I cannot adequately speak for why it was made. I assume it had something to do with the parents chose to remove themselves from the public school system and are now responsible for their education.

 

I do wonder if a child is attending one class and receiving a grade for said class, are you now responsible for a CATS score for that subject area. How is Holmes protected from not being responsible for those children's test scores?

 

I think you are hitting upon a statement that is a problem for the public school system. We are supposed to EVERYTHING. We have to be parents for those students who don't have parents that are concern. We have preschool starting at 3 years of age for those children that are "at-risk" and not getting the foundation they need. We are responsible for EVERY single type of learning issues whether they are physical, mental or combination. We can "choose" to not educate them as some schools in the state get to do. (And then smile and tell us they are better than us. I feel a Jack Nicholson "A Few Good Men" speech coming out.)

 

We are responsible for every single kid the courts FORCE back into the school system and we are responsible for making sure they want to learn whether they are their parents want to or not. We have school psychologists to deal with these types of issues. We have to now provide tutoring afterschool because parents were not making sure their children were doing their homework.

 

We are to educate on drugs, alcohol, tobacco, unprotected sex and better not go the route of absinence, and evolution. We are to make sure that the child is medically being taken care. We have to provide breakfast and lunch because in a lot of cases, the parents are not. We have to babysit and stay with students till sometimes 5 or 6 at night after the parents just couldn't make it to pick their kid up from school.

 

We have to provide all sorts of sports to give children an opportuntity at a college scholarships. We have to change the directions we are going at the whims of the politicians and Frankfort.

 

And by the way, we have to do it with a smile on our face as everyone dumps on us for doing a poor job.

 

I can certainly understand your frustration, and empathize with your position. But, LBBC, the problem isn't the private schools, nor the home schooled families. The problem is in what we've allowed our society to decay to the degree that it has. We've allowed parents who have no thoughts of caring for their own children dump them into the laps of the schools (meaning teachers, administrators, etc), by virtue of legal proceedings that were initiated by well-meaning parents seeking the best for their child. As with so many programs in the United States, the intent is right, but the abuse of the system has caused nothing but the destruction of good principles.

 

The fact that there are parents out there who DO care, many in public schools, but as you pointed out, one of the strengths of private schools is the strong family structure and involvement. I'm all for Education Reform that addresses discipline, and enforces it.

 

Public schools can't be everything to all. I know it, and I think most people know it. But what has happened is that legislators and lawyers (well-meaning again), have stepped in over and over to force schools to provide the maximum to and for the minimum. I disagree with this. I think that services should be provided, but done in such a way that is both cost effective. I mentioned pooling resources among several schools. Not one poster had anything to say about that. No one wants to think outside the box. No one wants to try to come up with creative solutions. Everyone keeps wanting to keep pounding square pegs into round holes until they wear down and fit.

 

Who in the world is that benefitting?

What it comes down to is that public schools hate anything that takes students out of their schools and revenue streams. Public school teachers scream loudest at anything that may remotely decrease funding to their school and hence their paychecks. When modern home schooling began, all of the teachers were pitching a fit, saying that parents are incapable of educating their own children. School boards have tried some pretty lowdown things to get kids back in their schools and out of the homes. Since the courts have usually ruled with the home schoolers and the standardized testing is proving the benefit of home schools, the public schools are in an absolute tizzy. Its not about what's fair, its about payback.

I live right across the street from Conner in Hebron, and I dont know much about that school. But if I felt I could give my child a better education than the school, why should I have to (1) punish my child by not letting him play football there if I wanted to home school, or (2) have to send him there to play football, but not give him the education that I want. Its not fair.

 

Fairfan - you and I are having a communications problem.

 

I did not read the Tebow article thus I do not know the facts.

 

My argument has been based on your post that I quoted above.

 

You state (I think) that if you live across from Conner yet choose to home school that your child should be able to play football at Conner. I believe your basis is that you pay property taxes in Conner's district.

 

Assuming I have understood you correctly:

 

I live across from Conner as well but I don't want to send my boy to Conner(not real world as I am a proud alum of CSHS) and , instead, send my boy to St Henry. Like you, I don't want to be punished for choosing what I think is a better education alternative for my beloved son. My boy wants to play football. Since I pay taxes that support Conner why can't my boy play football at Conner? As you said, why should he be punished because I felt there was a better educational avenue?

 

Its the same argument, right?

What it comes down to is that public schools hate anything that takes students out of their schools and revenue streams. Public school teachers scream loudest at anything that may remotely decrease funding to their school and hence their paychecks. When modern home schooling began, all of the teachers were pitching a fit, saying that parents are incapable of educating their own children. School boards have tried some pretty lowdown things to get kids back in their schools and out of the homes. Since the courts have usually ruled with the home schoolers and the standardized testing is proving the benefit of home schools, the public schools are in an absolute tizzy. Its not about what's fair, its about payback.

 

:confused: Holy Moly..You really believe all of that?

If we are talking about Tim Tebow, he was enrolled at that school where he played football. Thats just it..you have to be enrolled in the school, you play spots for. So if he gets his education at CCh thats where he in enrolled. Am I on the right page yet?

 

 

I found an article on Tebow and he was NOT enrolled at Neace High School. He played football there but was home-schooled. He was actually enrolled at a private school prior to that while being home-schooled.

 

The Dickingson Act in Florida does not limit a home-schoolers participation to public schools only.

:confused: Holy Moly..You really believe all of that?

Sorry, but yes I do. I was educated in a public school, as were my children. But the vindictiveness that I see coming from many public schools is unbelievable. Fortunately Covington isn't one of them. But in my experience, the people who are most against home schooling all seem to be educators. That's like me being mad at people for doing their own taxes.

Sorry, but yes I do. I was educated in a public school, as were my children. But the vindictiveness that I see coming from many public schools is unbelievable. Fortunately Covington isn't one of them. But in my experience, the people who are most against home schooling all seem to be educators. That's like me being mad at people for doing their own taxes.

O.K. then but since it isn't the one where you raised your kids can you possibly give us an idea of what public schools you might be speaking of?

Yes, parents who home-school their kids pay property taxes and such that benefit the school system. But don't schools get money from the state based on average daily attendance? By not enrolling their students in the public school system, aren't they costing that system money?

Yes, parents who home-school their kids pay property taxes and such that benefit the school system. But don't schools get money from the state based on average daily attendance? By not enrolling their students in the public school system, aren't they costing that system money?

:thumb: Great point..

The day will come when home schooled kids will be able to play sports at the local school. It is happening in Florida and about to happen in Alabama. Its coming. All it will take is some top notch athlete's parents electing to home school Jr. and some coach will press the issue and presto, the deal will be done. Why is anyone against it? What would it hurt? Aren't sports supposed to be about the fun and development of the kids?

FYI, I would support a private school kid that plays a sport not offered at his school the chance to play that sport at the local public school. Whats the harm?

Yes, parents who home-school their kids pay property taxes and such that benefit the school system. But don't schools get money from the state based on average daily attendance? By not enrolling their students in the public school system, aren't they costing that system money?

 

True but I'm still paying property taxes regardless of how the state distributes the money. That is the basis for those that say home schoolers should still be allowed access to public school activities and other advantages.

The day will come when home schooled kids will be able to play sports at the local school. It is happening in Florida and about to happen in Alabama. Its coming. All it will take is some top notch athlete's parents electing to home school Jr. and some coach will press the issue and presto, the deal will be done. Why is anyone against it? What would it hurt? Aren't sports supposed to be about the fun and development of the kids?

FYI, I would support a private school kid that plays a sport not offered at his school the chance to play that sport at the local public school. Whats the harm?

 

Harm? None that I can think of.

Your telling me that ALL public schools have better education than what a home school student could get...NO WAY, your not even close on that one.

 

I would love to see what supporting information you could show to make your claim.

For those that think the child should be allowed to participate:

 

Should the home-schooled child be allowed to come to school for AP Math? Should the child be allowed to come to school for choir?

 

If "no", please explain and explain and compare it to the football scenario.

 

 

Or look at it another way, suppose that a student has a problem with the math department at thier particular school. Should they be allowed to to leave school early each day and get home schooled in math. Why not? For those that support a home school student getting to participate in extra circullar activites at schools they do not attend, why shouldn't they also get to pick and choose what classes to attend.

 

I think that it is a bunch of bull. If the school isn't good enough for your child than leave it at that. Kids might as well learn now that there are consequenses for every decision that is made. If you make the decision be willing to live with the consequenses. I guess home schooled kids should also be able to attend their local school's prom and be on the ballot for homecoming king. Maybe compete in the talent show or science fair. What about the spelling bee. Maybe the local school should have to consider the home schooled student as a potential canidate to be named "Student of the Month", they should also be listed on the honor roll in the school paper if they qualify, (of course they will, with that superior education). Speaking of newspaper, they should let a home schooled kid be the editior. Oh, I know, if a home schooled kid has a 4.0 and higher G.P.A. than any of those dumb kids with their public school educations, they should be allowed to give the Validictorian's address and walk the line at graduation. The Ironic that those that have the better than thou attitude regarding education would have no problem assimilating their kids with the lowly public schoolers for extracircular purposes.

Another can of worms that would be opened is in a city like Louisville, what school would the star home schooled QB play for. Would he have to play with at his local school, or could he go play at a magnet school like male. Or could he play for St. X. or Trinity. Let the recruiting battles begin. (I know this never happens) It's a perfect situation. The kid is home schooled thus no tuition. Athletic scholarships are unnecessary.