There is a fund raising program that has been going on a few years now which many of us have donated to.

 

However I am curious as to what improvements people want to see in Manual Stadium. I've been to almost all of the Jefferson County stadiums except for the new St X and Trinity stadiums, and I don't get the sense that it is run down or in need of drastic renovation.

 

I don't want field turf, the consessions are covered, there are visitor locker rooms, it has a great score board, the feild was replaced not that long ago and is better maintained than most, I feel like the dim lighting is a homefeild advantage due to our running stlye and dark red jerseys, it has one of the best press boxes, and there is a row of covered bleachers on the homefield side.

 

Short of luxury boxes I don't see what people want.

 

Only thing I think that it needs is lighting, but to some extent I suppose that it is no different from Trinity having college goal posts.

It appears to me that most of the people bashing this are private school supporters. I guess they don't want any public schools to have a new nice stadium. Maybe they are scared that it will take away one of their selling points when out of the recruiting trail. :laugh:

 

St. X does not have a stadium, so if your statement is accurate about private schools it must not refer to the Tigers.

 

Good for Fairdale! The new stadium will be quite an asset to the school and the community. To paraphrase the campaign requirement "I'm a taxpayer (with a youngster in private school) and I endorse this message." The legislators just allocated $75,000,000 to U of L for an arena when they already have a perfectly good arena, so why not $300,000 to Fairdale for a new stadium?

 

BTW Ram fans, I believe Manual has the top high school stadium in the Commonwealth. If it were up to me, X would remain a tenant rather than spend millions for a new stadium.

I was just joking with your partner in crime. Tony was poking me with a stick, I was poking back.

 

 

Oh yeah that's it blame it one me :lol:

Oh yeah that's it blame it one me :lol:

 

 

But that makes so much more sense...

Welcome to the big time, Fairdale! If All Tell has chosen to single you out as a program that receives special benefits from the taxpayer, you have arrived!

Since you are an alum of the school that get the sweetest treatment from JCPS you certainly would know.

 

If all public schools are to be treated equally then what is flawed about my statement?

Rock, who benefits from this field? Kids...right. Thats why its OK. AllTell, Maybe we can ask JCPS to turf our field like yours will be. Can't wait to see that place when done. How was the Derby Parade? Did you see the Fairdale football team out there?

Since you are an alum of the school that get the sweetest treatment from JCPS you certainly would know.

 

If all public schools are to be treated equally then what is flawed about my statement?

 

Who says they aren't treated equally? Let's not limit the definition of 'equal treatment' to simply the quality of a school's sports venue. Let's briefly consider some of the other types of tax-funded resources provided to public schools. Take the four schools you mentioned: Atherton, Iroquois, Moore, and Southern. Consulting the annual School Guide published by Louisville Magazine (http://www.louisville.com/louliving/schools.aspx?t=4), each of those schools has a significantly lower student/teacher ratio than Male (that is, on a per child basis, the JCPS spends more of its resources for teachers at Atherton, Iroquois, Moore, and Southern than it does at Male). With the exception of Atherton, each of those schools also has more computers on a per student basis than Male does. And each of those schools has a much higher percentage of students who receive free or reduced cost school lunches (again, more tax-funded monetary resources spent on the lower performing schools).

 

So, in the quest for your 'ideal' world of equal treatment, would you increase the operating budgets of schools like Male and Manual or cut the budgets for Atherton, Iroquois, Moore, and Southern? Or would you divert some of the 'excess' funding for teacher's salaries at those schools into capital projects to improve the football facilities? :confused:

Who says they aren't treated equally? Let's not limit the definition of 'treatment' to simply the quality of a school's sports venue. Let's briefly consider some of the other types of tax-funded resources provided to public schools. Take the four schools you mentioned: Atherton, Iroquois, Moore, and Southern. Consulting the annual School Guide published by Louisville Magazine (http://www.louisville.com/louliving/schools.aspx?t=4), each of those schools has a significantly lower student/teacher ratio than Male (that is, on a per child basis, the JCPS spends more of its resources for teachers at Atherton, Iroquois, Moore, and Southern than it does at Male). With the exception of Atherton, each of those schools also has more computers on a per student basis than Male does. And each of those schools has a much higher percentage of students who receive free or reduced cost school lunches (again, more tax-funded monetary resources spent on the lower performing schools).

 

So, in the quest for your 'ideal' world of equal treatment, would you increase the operating budgets of schools like Male and Manual or cut the budgets for Atherton, Iroquois, Moore, and Southern? Or would you divert some of the 'excess' funding for teacher's salaries at those schools into capital projects to improve the football facilities? :confused:

 

Gotta call ya out on this one H. Some time ago while discussing funding of public schools. I said that the publics benefit from the fact that a number of kids choose private school. You (and others) claimed that it hurt the school because funding is based on enrollment numbers. Now you contend that schools with low enrollment have an advantage.:confused:

BTW, congrats to Fairdale on their new venue.

Gotta call ya out on this one H. Some time ago while discussing funding of public schools. I said that the publics benefit from the fact that a number of kids choose private school. You (and others) claimed that it hurt the school because funding is based on enrollment numbers. Now you contend that schools with low enrollment have an advantage.:confused:

BTW, congrats to Fairdale on their new venue.

 

I don't recall making that statement, but if you can find the post I'll be interested to review it. It is common knowledge that the public school system receives funding based on how many students they have. That doesn't mean that the public school decision makers (the JCPS, in this case) allocate the funding they receive uniformly across all schools in thier purview. Look, in this case the numbers don't lie. The statistics published in the school guide demonstrate quite clearly that the JCPS and federal government spend more on a per student basis for teachers, technology, and subsidized lunches at the underperforming schools (the schools All Tell contends get shafted in favor of the Males and Manuals). Maybe All Tell believes that the educational disparity would disappear if only for better football facilities at Iroquois, Southern, Moore, et al. If you think the stats I posted are inaccurate, get the Louisville Magazine or the JCPS to publish a correction and I will retract my statements.

I don't disagree. All schools have their purpose. Most of the schools in Jefferson County aren't poor in athletics due to an old stadium. It is more about focus. I think most would find that the schools that perform poorly just aren't that concerned with being great. That is not a slap at those kids.

Who says they aren't treated equally? Let's not limit the definition of 'equal treatment' to simply the quality of a school's sports venue. Let's briefly consider some of the other types of tax-funded resources provided to public schools. Take the four schools you mentioned: Atherton, Iroquois, Moore, and Southern. Consulting the annual School Guide published by Louisville Magazine (http://www.louisville.com/louliving/schools.aspx?t=4), each of those schools has a significantly lower student/teacher ratio than Male (that is, on a per child basis, the JCPS spends more of its resources for teachers at Atherton, Iroquois, Moore, and Southern than it does at Male). With the exception of Atherton, each of those schools also has more computers on a per student basis than Male does. And each of those schools has a much higher percentage of students who receive free or reduced cost school lunches (again, more tax-funded monetary resources spent on the lower performing schools).

 

So, in the quest for your 'ideal' world of equal treatment, would you increase the operating budgets of schools like Male and Manual or cut the budgets for Atherton, Iroquois, Moore, and Southern? Or would you divert some of the 'excess' funding for teacher's salaries at those schools into capital projects to improve the football facilities? :confused:

 

All that funding is based on national Title one scores and the money has to go to the lower achieveing schools that do not get to handpick the best for their programs. If JCPS had a choice they would. It is out of their hands. Title one dictates all funding for staffing PD and technology. Fed Dollars.:thumb:

I don't recall making that statement, but if you can find the post I'll be interested to review it. It is common knowledge that the public school system receives funding based on how many students they have. That doesn't mean that the public school decision makers (the JCPS, in this case) allocate the funding they receive uniformly across all schools in thier purview. Look, in this case the numbers don't lie. The statistics published in the school guide demonstrate quite clearly that the JCPS and federal government spend more on a per student basis for teachers, technology, and subsidized lunches at the underperforming schools (the schools All Tell contends get shafted in favor of the Males and Manuals). Maybe All Tell believes that the educational disparity would disappear if only for better football facilities at Iroquois, Southern, Moore, et al. If you think the stats I posted are inaccurate, get the Louisville Magazine or the JCPS to publish a correction and I will retract my statements.

 

When Iroquois, Atherton, Moore et al. get to cherry pick the best students then they will be on equal footing to the Males and Manuals. Simple as that.

 

To deny that is to deny reality.

 

There's a whole lot more to the disparity between schools then athletic facilities.

I don't recall making that statement, but if you can find the post I'll be interested to review it. It is common knowledge that the public school system receives funding based on how many students they have. That doesn't mean that the public school decision makers (the JCPS, in this case) allocate the funding they receive uniformly across all schools in thier purview. Look, in this case the numbers don't lie. The statistics published in the school guide demonstrate quite clearly that the JCPS and federal government spend more on a per student basis for teachers, technology, and subsidized lunches at the underperforming schools (the schools All Tell contends get shafted in favor of the Males and Manuals). Maybe All Tell believes that the educational disparity would disappear if only for better football facilities at Iroquois, Southern, Moore, et al. If you think the stats I posted are inaccurate, get the Louisville Magazine or the JCPS to publish a correction and I will retract my statements.

 

Lets get this out in the open first I'm PUBLIC..

 

1) How much parent involvement do you have at your "private" school? EX: Jonny is about to fail a grade and the tuition that Mom and Dad has paid has gone for not??? Now think about some of the low income kids that the publics HAVE to educate and call them "underperforming" when the parent could care less:sssh:

 

2) Public schools are funded by SEEK (Support Education Excellence in Kentucky) formula which is based on the average daily attendance NOT the number of kids enrolled which provides all State schools with the appropriate State funding regardless of the districts wealth. Individual districts inspite of the SEEK can and do tax their local community on utilities. I guess you need to know that.

 

3) How many special needs students does your school accommodate? Public schools MUST educate ALL kids not just the ones the knock on the door. You must consider the different disablities we work with on a daily basis.

 

H,

 

Now that you have some more correct information about public schools I would like to say that I don't agree that $300,000 of the State budget was allocated to one school for a community site because all public school venues at there heart are public facilities. What can you say other than politics:confused:

Who cares that they got a new stadium from state money? They are a public school and entitled, I am glad that the money wasn't given to the golden child public school. I hope Fairdale thrives with the new digs.

Onetoya,

 

I don't know if you're aware, but Male is a public school (It wasn't clear from your post that you understand that).

 

Regardless of the mechanism underpinning the funding of public schools (based on daily attendance, test scores, whatever), the bottom line is that the schools that were claimed to be underserved by the school system are in fact provided with more resources per student than the so-called public elites in many important areas. I never said this was inappropriate (indeed, given the school system's responsibility to provide education for all, you would expect some schools to require more resources than others). I just wanted to point out how ridiculous it is to claim favoritism toward a few schools when, in reality, almost every other school in the system receives more resources.