better athletic or school facilities?

Both. That is in general.

 

Most of the basketball gyms I have been in at private schools are rather small but nice facilities. The schools I have been in that have the larger gyms are public schools. Mason County, George Rogers Clark, Montgomery County's, Harrison County's and Bourbon County's all dwarf the size of St. Patrick or Bishop Brossart.

 

I coached in Sacred Heart's gym (they were defending state champions at the time) a few years back and was surprised on how small it was. It is much smaller than our middle school's gym.

 

As far as your additional comments on funding and where it is spent, the money spent in the classrooms and for building projects are too different pots in public schools. You can not redirect it from building projects to things for the classroom. Montgomery's new gym, do you think that is being built with taxpayer funds or private donations?

Both. That is in general.

 

Most of the basketball gyms I have been in at private schools are rather small but nice facilities. The schools I have been in that have the larger gyms are public schools. Mason County, George Rogers Clark, Montgomery County's, Harrison County's and Bourbon County's all dwarf the size of St. Patrick or Bishop Brossart.

 

I coached in Sacred Heart's gym (they were defending state champions at the time) a few years back and was surprised on how small it was. It is much smaller than our middle school's gym.

 

As far as your additional comments on funding and where it is spent, the money spent in the classrooms and for building projects are too different pots in public schools. You can not redirect it from building projects to things for the classroom. Montgomery's new gym, do you think that is being built with taxpayer funds or private donations?

 

Is bigger, better? No pun intended... Although I know of some very nice facilities at both public and non-public schools.

 

I guess I am looking at it from the standpoint of most school athletics being played outside of the gym. Football, Soccer, Baseball, Track, Softball. I can find examples of very good athletic facilities for both non-public and public and those that have better facilities it is mostly due to booster support not federal or state funding.

Why just males? :confused: :confused: In girls sports, the domination of privates is much more pronounced than on the male side. If you are going to only look at one gender, it seems since the domination is more on the girls side, that the girls numbers would be the ones to consider.

 

Letabrotherspeak may have been only referring to football. All other sports would remain the same as far a classification (if there is any at this time).

Letabrotherspeak may have been only referring to football. All other sports would remain the same as far a classification (if there is any at this time).

Gotcha. Thanks.:thumb:

ladiesbballcoach,

 

We strongly disagree but I am glad to see this is an educational process. At least you now know you have open enrollment at your school. Many people are in the dark in this area and they continually spread erroneous information.

Gunner11, I understand what you are saying. However, we all know that if a decent athlete from out of the district wants to enroll in a public school with open enrollment, room will always be found.

 

As for the argument that private schools can "pick and choose" their students whereas the public schools are required to accept any and all comers, that is merely a fact of life. That is really one of the advantages that a private school has over a public school. The endless flow of tax dollars into the public schools is an enormous advantage for them over the private schools. We "privates" disapprove of this situation since a large part of those endless funds are coming out of our pockets. However, this situation is merely another fact of life.

 

We each exploit our advantages and bemoan our disadvantages but, in the end, they are all apart of the equation.

Gunner11, I understand what you are saying. However, we all know that if a decent athlete from out of the district wants to enroll in a public school with open enrollment, room will always be found.

 

As for the argument that private schools can "pick and choose" their students whereas the public schools are required to accept any and all comers, that is merely a fact of life. That is really one of the advantages that a private school has over a public school. The endless flow of tax dollars into the public schools is an enormous advantage for them over the private schools. We "privates" disapprove of this situation since a large part of those endless funds are coming out of our pockets. However, this situation is merely another fact of life.

 

We each exploit our advantages and bemoan our disadvantages but, in the end, they are all apart of the equation.

 

Fair enough. I do not think that the criteria for accepting students that apply to an open enrollment school includes athletic ability. Just like I would not state that if little Johnny or Suzie could not afford a non-public school education but was an outstanding athlete that a booster would come up with some money to pay their tuition(Are you saying that this situation happens)?You are getting a very good return on your investment in those tax dollars that are coming out of your pocket though. Compared to the property taxes that you have paid, how much has the value of your home increased? Reasons most often cited for moving are change of job and local schools. If you have good local schools then the value of your home that you are paying property taxes on has increased significantly in the last 10+ years. So I would not say you are getting nothing for those property tax dollars. Also the amount of those tax dollars going toward athletics is minute. Tax dollars are also not endless. Most increases require a referendum which must be voted upon by the people.

 

I will continue to coach my players to beat everyone we play, public or non-public, it does not matter to me!:thumb:

I can only comment on the situation that exists in the area in which I live. While athletic ability is obviously not a stated reason for area open enrollment schools to accept "outsiders", you can be sure that all potential students who possess superior athletic ability will be admitted whereas a superior art student may well be sent elsewhere. I suspect that the result would be similar in all parts of the Commonwealth since athletics, in reality, take priority over academics around most schools.

 

I would agree that my real estate has appreciated over the years. However, little of that appreciation in value, if any, has resulted from the quality of our local public schools. As is usually the case, the overall neighborhood, the subdivision restrictions, and the quantity and quality of the amenities count for much more.

 

All in all, I get very little in return for the obscene amount of dollars I pay to the public schools through property, income, and other miscellaneous taxes. That is just fact. Nonetheless, as I said above, that is part of the price I must pay and, as a private school supporter, must accept as part of the deal. The choice is mine and I made that choice many years ago. I have never had any reason to second guess that decision.

 

Actually, the right to send my child to a private school that can "pick and choose" and, thus, avoid many of the problems that exist in all public schools, in my mind, more than balances the scales.

 

As I said, differences are inherent in the system and we can all make our own choices. However, we can never expect the built in advantages of each system to disappear. We need to accept them as part of the process rather than using them as a crutch as seems to be the case with some.

As I said, differences are inherent in the system and we can all make our own choices. However, we can never expect the built in advantages of each system to disappear. We need to accept them as part of the process rather than using them as a crutch as seems to be the case with some.

:ylsuper: :ylsuper: :ylsuper: :ylsuper: :ylsuper: :ylsuper:

I can only comment on the situation that exists in the area in which I live. While athletic ability is obviously not a stated reason for area open enrollment schools to accept "outsiders", you can be sure that all potential students who possess superior athletic ability will be admitted whereas a superior art student may well be sent elsewhere. I suspect that the result would be similar in all parts of the Commonwealth since athletics, in reality, take priority over academics around most schools.

 

I would agree that my real estate has appreciated over the years. However, little of that appreciation in value, if any, has resulted from the quality of our local public schools. As is usually the case, the overall neighborhood, the subdivision restrictions, and the quantity and quality of the amenities count for much more.

 

All in all, I get very little in return for the obscene amount of dollars I pay to the public schools through property, income, and other miscellaneous taxes. That is just fact. Nonetheless, as I said above, that is part of the price I must pay and, as a private school supporter, must accept as part of the deal. The choice is mine and I made that choice many years ago. I have never had any reason to second guess that decision.

 

Actually, the right to send my child to a private school that can "pick and choose" and, thus, avoid many of the problems that exist in all public schools, in my mind, more than balances the scales.

 

As I said, differences are inherent in the system and we can all make our own choices. However, we can never expect the built in advantages of each system to disappear. We need to accept them as part of the process rather than using them as a crutch as seems to be the case with some.

 

I do not know where you live so I will take your opinion that property values have not increased based on the quality of your local schools. In the area I live, there is a direct correlation in the increase in the value of housing compared to surrounding areas and it is mostly derived from the local public school being consistently rated one of the best in the state. People move to this area specifically for the schools. My property taxes are amongst the highest in the state and worth every penny IMO. If you live in Boyd County and in Ashland my property taxes are 50% higher than yours!!! The amount that I pay just to the local school district is nearly the entire amount of your property tax bill. These taxes are hardly an advantage though when it comes to athletics. You and I know that successful athletic programs at non-public and public schools would not exist without massive booster support. There are no successful public school athletic programs that make it on what pitiful amount of tax dollars they get after paying teachers, adminstrators, equipment, etc.

 

What "problems" are you speaking of that exist in all public schools that do not exist in non-public schools? Having been involved with both, I know of no problems that are exclusive to one or the other. Please elaborate.

 

I have never used any advantages other schools have as a crutch. I like beating every team we play big or small, public or non-public.

 

I do disagree with your notion that room would be found for the athlete ahead of the scholar. I do not think that is that case. I am sure you would disagree with me stating that little Johnny got the Smith Revocable Trust scholarship(that the criteria for receiving is determined by the grantor of the award) ahead of little Suzy because he can run a 4.3 40-yard-dash and can catch the football and Suzy can only play the violin and is a top performing arts student who made a 1600 on her SAT. At the public and non-public schools that I have been involved with academics comes first and athletics is a privilege not a right. We have managed to win state championships with that idea and I would like to keep it that way.

Gunner11, you describe a scenerio from your experience that should exist in all school systems- public or private. Assuming your experience is as described, I commend the school system(s) in which you have worked. However, I seriously doubt that the same exists in most other areas. Football and basketball bring notariety, financial support (some legal, some not, and some "very gray"), and recognition. Violins do not. Sad? Of course. But, still the case in Kentucky and most other states. For example, Rose Hill recently had a student who, among many other achievements, scored a 36 on the ACT. It also had a middle schooler named Ovinton Mayo. Guess who is still remembered and heralded throughout the Commonwealth? I'm sure Ashland and Russell have had similar situations. The result is the same. We all know of Pitino, Smith, Petrullo, et als. But, on the other hand, who is the dean of the Chase, UK, and/or U of L law schools? Who knows? Who really cares? As unfortunate as it may be, schools, all schools, are perceived by the mass population by the success, or lack thereof, of their athletic programs. School administrators and school boards are certainly aware of this fact. Thus, if it gets down to one spot (which I believe is hypothetical rather than really the case because room will be found for both and the children with "nothing to offer" will be sent on their way), the athlete will win out over the violinist (everything being equal "politically", of course).

 

As for the taxes paid to public schools, property owners in your area may pay a higher rate but that doesn't necessarily translate into higher dollars paid. It, of course, is based upon the value of property to which the rate is applied. Please keep in mind that I am not complaining. I can always take steps to decrease my tax. I am merely saying that advantages and disadvantages exist in both situatuions- public and private- and we cannot change them. We just need to figure them into the mix.

 

Many of the problems that exist in the public schools also exist in private schools. However, by the nature of private schools, the problems are far less severe. As you say, the privates can "pick and choose" students. Many potential problems are omitted by this process. Discipline, something that is, from what my public friends and contacts tell me, is a premium in the public schools. That is not the case in private schools. If a problem student surfaces in a private school, he or she is sent on his or her way. In a public school, much more is tolerated and appropriate disciplinary action may well result in an extended association with the local court system. That is how it works in this "enlightened" age of social promotion, no child left behind, testing for rewards, KERA, etc. Support it and defend it if you like. However, although I must fund it, I choose to avoid it as much as possible as a citizen, as a parent, as a business owner, and as an employer.

 

As for the "crutch" statement, I was certainly not including you among that group. However, I do believe that many public school supporters, led by the likes of our clueless friends from Somerset and Louisville Eastern, continue to use their crutches as excuses rather than recognizing the natural differences between publics and privates and adjusting to the situation.

Gunner11, you describe a scenerio from your experience that should exist in all school systems- public or private. Assuming your experience is as described, I commend the school system(s) in which you have worked. However, I seriously doubt that the same exists in most other areas. Football and basketball bring notariety, financial support (some legal, some not, and some "very gray"), and recognition. Violins do not. Sad? Of course. But, still the case in Kentucky and most other states. For example, Rose Hill recently had a student who, among many other achievements, scored a 36 on the ACT. It also had a middle schooler named Ovinton Mayo. Guess who is still remembered and heralded throughout the Commonwealth? I'm sure Ashland and Russell have had similar situations. The result is the same. We all know of Pitino, Smith, Petrullo, et als. But, on the other hand, who is the dean of the Chase, UK, and/or U of L law schools? Who knows? Who really cares? As unfortunate as it may be, schools, all schools, are perceived by the mass population by the success, or lack thereof, of their athletic programs. School administrators and school boards are certainly aware of this fact. Thus, if it gets down to one spot (which I believe is hypothetical rather than really the case because room will be found for both and the children with "nothing to offer" will be sent on their way), the athlete will win out over the violinist (everything being equal "politically", of course).

 

As for the taxes paid to public schools, property owners in your area may pay a higher rate but that doesn't necessarily translate into higher dollars paid. It, of course, is based upon the value of property to which the rate is applied. Please keep in mind that I am not complaining. I can always take steps to decrease my tax. I am merely saying that advantages and disadvantages exist in both situatuions- public and private- and we cannot change them. We just need to figure them into the mix.

 

Many of the problems that exist in the public schools also exist in private schools. However, by the nature of private schools, the problems are far less severe. As you say, the privates can "pick and choose" students. Many potential problems are omitted by this process. Discipline, something that is, from what my public friends and contacts tell me, is a premium in the public schools. That is not the case in private schools. If a problem student surfaces in a private school, he or she is sent on his or her way. In a public school, much more is tolerated and appropriate disciplinary action may well result in an extended association with the local court system. That is how it works in this "enlightened" age of social promotion, no child left behind, testing for rewards, KERA, etc. Support it and defend it if you like. However, although I must fund it, I choose to avoid it as much as possible as a citizen, as a parent, as a business owner, and as an employer.

 

As for the "crutch" statement, I was certainly not including you among that group. However, I do believe that many public school supporters, led by the likes of our clueless friends from Somerset and Louisville Eastern, continue to use their crutches as excuses rather than recognizing the natural differences between publics and privates and adjusting to the situation.

 

I am not exactly sure of the motives of the "friends" from Somerset or Louisville Eastern, but I am very sure that the drastic measures that they are calling for IMO are not warranted as a solution to the issues at hand. Maybe they are using it as an excuse or crutch, I am not sure. I know that I do not feel that way. I do know that comparing the enrollment situation at a non-public school to open enrollment at a public school is not an equal comparison. Is that an advantage for non-public schools? Sure it is. Is it an advantage that requires Prop 20 or any of the task force proposals? Absolutely not. If a person wants to drive their child 40 miles each way to a non-public school, more power to them. They without a doubt should have the ability to do so. As long as they are seeking that opportunity on their own, I am all for it.

 

To your point about "problems" at public schools. Having been involved at each public and non-public schools they have the same problems with discipline, drugs, apathy, disrespect, etc. I am sure the levels of each may vary at both, but they are still there. I agree that at some non-public schools it is easier to expell students, but having said that, I have seen kids expelled from the local public high school (for fighting, drugs, alcohol)and have enrolled in the local non-public school the following week. Vice versa occurs as well. I am fortunate that the public school I am involved with now has very few discipline problems. The majority of the students are very respectful and are by and large good kids that are on a college track program.

 

Long term consistent booster support is probably the largest factor in the success of an athletic program. Followed by quality of coaching and the offseason discipline of athletes. If you look at all the schools that are having success, public and non-public, those three things are overriding factors.

Actually, Gunner11, although our loyalties lie in different camps, it appears that we pretty much agree. There are advantages enjoyed by each group that cannot be present with the other group. For instance, publics cannot rid themselves of problem students as easily as can private schools. On the other hand, funding of academic and athletic programs will always be easier for the public schools because of the tax support.

 

These differences will never change. The two systems of education cannot ever be the same. The differences are really the strengths of each. Therefore, I believe each group should just accept that there are differences and adjust to the situation. As for my "clueless friends" remark, I was, of course, referring to Sears and Sexton. Neither, in my opinion, is a good spokesperson for the public schools because both play the victim role to extremes. Their credibility is minimal.

Again, in case anyone forgot, you can't self impose restrictions on your own school district and then complain that others won't do the same. The practice is not only stupid but it is un-American.

Well... it was American for 13 years during prohibition when the 18th Amendment was the law of the land. It worked so well, we got the 21st Amendment in 1933 for no other reason than to nullify the 18th Amendment, making it the only provision in the Constitution to be explicitly modified.

 

Those in favor of a split remind me of those in the temperance movement. They have chosen to restrict themselves, and want to insist that everyone else be prohibited by the same self-imposed restrictions.

 

If history is any indication, this won’t work.