WoodyJr,

 

I'm hesitant to speculate too much, as I don't sit on the school board, but the establishment of magnet school and traditional school programs had a lot to do with it, I'd think. District lines were also blurred when busing started in Jefferson County schools in the 1970's.

WoodyJr,

 

I'm hesitant to speculate too much, as I don't sit on the school board, but the establishment of magnet school and traditional school programs had a lot to do with it, I'd think. District lines were also blurred when busing started in Jefferson County schools in the 1970's.

 

 

Trying to recoup from the debacle that was bussing had alot to do with it.

That's what the debate is really all about. Rural ballers MUST go to their local school, so, in order to maintain a semblance of fairness, Urban schools must play by the same rule. The solution is to abolish open enrollment, and make the kids go to school in their home Districts.

 

Open enrollment was not brought about for athletic purposes, it was to give parents choice in education. I completely disagree with getting rid of open enrollment for athletic purposes at the expense of academics. Let's keep our priorities straight.

OK we're starting to get somewhere :thumb:

 

Schools are for education - thats our main point (allegedly)

By having open enrollment in the larger more heavily populated areas (I havent heard anyone outside of Lou Lex report this?) [No Ky seems to have whole diff makeup with a very wide variety of school sizes 1-4A - perhaps this keeps them from trying to kill each other off so to speak?] does this not risk the smaller, weaker performing schools, with less parent and/or extra support being run down farther and farther? I know magnet schools have been created as a tool to try and reinvent or rejuvenate certain schools {I recall Bryan Station being down pretty low and many very concerned about its future - then they established themselves as a magnet) but what if that doesnt work and also what if our education system becomes a "tiered" setup where certain people can get a superior education and the rest cannot - simply b/c they are at the bottom of the "criteria" created for those better schools? How is THAT an equal education for all our public school children???

 

I feel with the way education is in our country that this is going to become more& more of an issue. The heck with athletics - thats probably going to become an outside funded paraprofessional endeavor b/c no one will have enough money to pay for basic education let alone sports. we already see that with music, etc. I know in NYC the Giants and organizations ahve created a "take the field" iniative to flat out build sports faciklites b/c many schools had zilch or else krapola.

 

lets here some more from folks who have some good info

 

Woody Jr

Your problem is with the concept of stratification, which occurs in individual schools even if it isn't implemented by the district. In JCPS, the concept works like the entire county is one school, academically- and all students have the same opportunities, because they have the ability to go to whichever program or school they can get into.

 

Do you think it's wrong to allow more advanced students to take more advanced classes, or should they be forced to learn at the lowest common denomenator? Because there is no difference conceptually between having honors classes and having schools more academically rigorous than others.

Because of just this scenario you mentioned, the four years I spent in HS were the most colossal waste of time I could ever imagine. I learned essentially nothing in HS — the only useful thing I got from my days was the 9th grade typing class I took and failed, but I remember enough of it that it has been applied professionally. I never took a book home past ninth grade, and had difficulties dealing with the teachers because of how boring and unchallenging it was. All because the classes were dumbed down to the level of the kids whose mottos were "I can't wait 'til I turn 16, so I can quit!" As a result, I struggled mightily the early part of my college career because of how woefully unprepared I was because of my awful HS.

 

I wonder how many others like me had their academic progress stunted because of not having the options available. I would've killed to go to HS anywhere else than where I did.

 

Instead of griping and moaning about whatever advantages Jefferson Co. may have, people should be channeling their energies toward their communities and improving their local schools.

Woody Lexington still has boundries although they are pretty messed up (Bryan Station is getting ready to pull extra kids somehow or so I've heard) but the families cheat the system all the time. I can't tell you how many kids get kicked out of middle schools because the families lie about their District. Jefferson Co is open enrollment but I'm pretty sure schools like Manual and Male have some say so as to whom they let in. I'm sure our breathren on BGP representing those schools can shed some light.

While we are on the recruiting I often wonder why the Private schools are attacked so much on here but nothing is ever said about schools in Eastern KY that pull kids from WV or Northern KY school that pull from Cincy. What about all the transferring that goes on into certain schools isn't that a little fishy? I've coached in Eastern KY, Louisville and Lexington. I've been in the Private's and the Public's. It blows my mind that the perception the general public gets as opposed to the things I've seen! The general public are way of on a lot of this issue and just jump on the waggon because it's the thing to do.

Is there someone with a response to this point? There have been plenty to HDE but none to Top5. If there is, I would like to hear it. This is a very interesting discussion.

 

I included MountainTop in my response (see the end of the post). I felt the issues were tandum.

IT'S ABSOLUTELY Urban vs Rural [i am NOT going to use a red state blue state comparison b/c too many people will blur this important subject with their other views]

 

I keep seeing folks arguing that public schools don't have to limit their boundaries for accepting kids as if they just nilly willy made that up out of thin air. There have to be reasons!

 

I don't recall if the larger cities of say Lou / Lex didnt used to have enforced boundaries and then changed or if it's always been that way? If changed, what were the political, financial, legislative pressures that caused it?

 

As someone from a smaller city I recall having school boundaries originally mirroring the political lines of the city (those have evolved with annexation, etc. so I dont know that they match now) My "understanding" was that if we accepted X number of students from another school district then we had to reimburse that school district the fed/state/local?? monies equal to X's attendance. I believe it was a district by district agreement with sometimes no agreement reached - as I recall.

 

I'd like to hear some opinions (preferable FACTS) on whether publics alleged "choosing" to have district boundaries is/was simply a gentlemans agreement in order to prevent so-called recruiting or simply mass exodus from one school to another that would leave a % of PUBLIC children in an unstable educational situation? Was it enforced/recommended by state legislature?

After all, this is public school with a mandate to educate all children. So doesnt it make sense that each public school (or district) was established to serve a specific area - not have open enrollment?

 

Are/were the public schools concerned with an influx of students that would overcrowd them and make the educational setting poor or unstable for their current students. (ie. would they not have enough monies from say their tax base to expand - since these kids were from outside where they received their local tax money?)

 

There are other ideas/possible factors/reasons that I could throw out but I would really like to hear from others on:

 

1. what are the reasons the larger cities have open enrollment (and when/why did change - if it did so)

 

2. what are the reasons that most (it seems) public schools outside of those urban areas have a district boundary that is basically enforced for accepting students?

 

Lets keep it on the basic principles - not slamming others please?

 

Woody Jr

 

I feel I've addressed the open enrollment issue throughout several posts. I attended, and sent my kids through private schools K-12, so my knowledge of the exact reasons open enrollment was adopted is very limited, other than what I know of the academic choices afforded to JCPS students by offering school choice.

 

IMO, it's been a boon to the JCPS. The diversity of educational choices is incredible.

 

For the poster who mentioned the food service program, it's top notch, and those kids have national opportunities to showcase their skills. I also know that some kids do attend that aren't from that area (meaning the other side of Louisville).

 

I can't give you a timeline of the changes. I can tell you that I 100% would consider a public high school in Jefferson County if I felt it was the best option for my child.

I will play devil's advocate and stretch the imagination a little but the scenario is very possible. As we all know our state does not have the largest population and many schools are county schools, with that county school providing the largest employment/tax base in the county. Thus in many areas the school keeps the county/town or city government a float. So what could happen (I emphasize could, not would): Let's say county A has a school with 750 kids in a rural area. 25 miles away from school A school B is pretty good academically and athletically. So state-wide open enrollment is enacted and approved by state legislature allowing kids to go to school anywhere they choose regardless of residence. School A's enrollment drops 30% because many students want to attend school B and because there is no penalty they do. School A can now no longer afford to stay open because funding from the government is based on per child enrollment. The school shuts down, and the largest employer in the county/town is no longer providing jobs. Folks move out because they can't find a job in the town now (that includes all teachers, janitors, maintenance, drivers, cafeteria employees, teachers aides, etc...). Those that are lower income and can't afford to move now get move further below the poverty line. Now that school A has shut down and can't service the county many kids who lived on the other side of the county and can't find a way to school B can't attend school (what do we do about those kids??).

 

Again this is obviously hypothetical, but not really so far fetched that it couldn't happen in rural counties in our state. Open enrollment state wide could feasibly bankrupt some communities driving the poverty level up and making it very difficult for some to attend schools. If there are no districts who is responsible for transporting kids to school 45 miles away? It seems to me that district lines are created to make sure all students receive an education and allow them a school to go to that is within a reasonable distance of home. If schools shut down due to open enrollment, and that would happen, some kids may not attend school due to a several hour bus ride assuming they could be bussed.

 

Thought I would throw that scenario out there. I refuse to make this a public private debate because there are other threads for that. I am sure it will be butchered, but it is something that could happen in our rural areas.

 

I understand what you're saying. Rural areas face different challenges. But, that's why each school district is left to decide the best way to administer their schools and enrollment policies. By that token, as long as a school IS doing that, I don't see why anyone would perceive the result as unfair. In fact, I don't see many moaning about any academic successes at the open enrollment schools, or the private schools for that matter. It's disconcerting that the only focus of "unfairness" is in the athletic arena. You'd think school communities would be concerned that other schools/systems are passing them by in academic achievements, but there just doesn't seem to be any outcry about that.

 

The focus in Kentucky is absolutely skewed. There are newspaper articles, constant discussion and a huge divisive line athletically. But, once a year, an article will be printed about the academic progress (or lack there of) of Kentucky schools, and it's barely a blip on the screen.

 

This issue is so much bigger than where a student/athlete lives. SO much bigger, yet no one wants to dig below the surface and expose the grub worms that are eating away at the lawn. They'd rather just sod it over and hide it, and make the whole thing "level" again. But, those worms are still there, and they'll just eat away at the next layer.

I still say the debate isn't Public/Private, it's Urban/Rural.

Very few Rural school Districts have more than one HS anymore - the kids in those District have only ONE choice. If they live in a District with a HS that doesn't play good ball, for whatever reason, they can't go to another school outside their school District without violating KHSAA rules.

 

.

While the KHSAA say that it's against the rules I have seen a lot of nice football players transfer out of my High School the last few years so I don't buy the garbage that the KHSAA cracks down on this activity. In all fairness to the families, our school system is a mess right now and I'd probabaly pull my kids out too. I'm telling you I have coached in a Private High School, I've coached in a bordering Louisville school that supposedly loses kids to T+X (6 years I had one kid that might play football at X within the next year) and I coached in Eastern KY where I also grew up and graduated. I love all the places I've been but the general population has a clouded image when it comes to recruiting. Those who complain that there should be a Public/Private split will probably never sniff the carpet in Louisville. I think the 6 class system is the fairest way to do things. X+T will always have an advantage but they shouldn't be that far ahead of some of the bigger schools. Lexington has just as good if not better athletes but there hasn't been a group that buys into what a coach is trying to do and learned how to handle adversity in a tough game. I think a couple of schools are getting closer to closing the gap though.

Has anybody ever really thought about what would happen if there is a Public/Private split? If I'm the coach at T,X etc then I've saying OK you kicked us out now we are really going to recruit. I would sweep the youth leauges handing out scholarships to the best players in the league. I would then schedule the best teams in the country and watch my program fly to an elite national status. People better watch what they wish for!

While the KHSAA say that it's against the rules I have seen a lot of nice football players transfer out of my High School the last few years so I don't buy the garbage that the KHSAA cracks down on this activity. In all fairness to the families, our school system is a mess right now and I'd probabaly pull my kids out too. I'm telling you I have coached in a Private High School, I've coached in a bordering Louisville school that supposedly loses kids to T+X (6 years I had one kid that might play football at X within the next year) and I coached in Eastern KY where I also grew up and graduated. I love all the places I've been but the general population has a clouded image when it comes to recruiting. Those who complain that there should be a Public/Private split will probably never sniff the carpet in Louisville. I think the 6 class system is the fairest way to do things. X+T will always have an advantage but they shouldn't be that far ahead of some of the bigger schools. Lexington has just as good if not better athletes but there hasn't been a group that buys into what a coach is trying to do and learned how to handle adversity in a tough game. I think a couple of schools are getting closer to closing the gap though.

Has anybody ever really thought about what would happen if there is a Public/Private split? If I'm the coach at T,X etc then I've saying OK you kicked us out now we are really going to recruit. I would sweep the youth leauges handing out scholarships to the best players in the league. I would then schedule the best teams in the country and watch my program fly to an elite national status. People better watch what they wish for!

 

I'm with you on this. If they were to do such a thing, it would be open season, anybody's fair game.

While the KHSAA say that it's against the rules I have seen a lot of nice football players transfer out of my High School the last few years so I don't buy the garbage that the KHSAA cracks down on this activity. In all fairness to the families, our school system is a mess right now and I'd probabaly pull my kids out too. I'm telling you I have coached in a Private High School, I've coached in a bordering Louisville school that supposedly loses kids to T+X (6 years I had one kid that might play football at X within the next year) and I coached in Eastern KY where I also grew up and graduated. I love all the places I've been but the general population has a clouded image when it comes to recruiting. Those who complain that there should be a Public/Private split will probably never sniff the carpet in Louisville. I think the 6 class system is the fairest way to do things. X+T will always have an advantage but they shouldn't be that far ahead of some of the bigger schools. Lexington has just as good if not better athletes but there hasn't been a group that buys into what a coach is trying to do and learned how to handle adversity in a tough game. I think a couple of schools are getting closer to closing the gap though.

Has anybody ever really thought about what would happen if there is a Public/Private split? If I'm the coach at T,X etc then I've saying OK you kicked us out now we are really going to recruit. I would sweep the youth leauges handing out scholarships to the best players in the league. I would then schedule the best teams in the country and watch my program fly to an elite national status. People better watch what they wish for!

:thumb: Excellent post! While I doubt that private schools could afford a team of mercenaries, they certainly could target the best student-athletes that public schools have to offer, at all levels. Families who might not be able to afford a four-year private school education might be able to swing one or two years of tuition (full or partial) to place their sons on a national championship calber football team where they would have a better shot at earning a football ride.

:thumb: Excellent post! While I doubt that private schools could afford a team of mercenaries, they certainly could target the best student-athletes that public schools have to offer, at all levels. Families who might not be able to afford a four-year private school education might be able to swing one or two years of tuition (full or partial) to place their sons on a national championship calber football team where they would have a better shot at earning a football ride.

And if outside the KHSAA, that large alumni base would be free to set up as many athletic scholarships as they feel they need...