I don't know where you live, but we don't all have choices when it comes to where we send our kids to school. You and I may have the ability to send our child to a private school, we could sacrifice some things and make that happen, or we just have piles of money and that isn't a factor. But you take some of these city kids, even with financial aid, it is either tuition or putting food on the table, and most parents are gonna choose to put food on the table and send their kid to the public school. And I have argued that just because you send your child to a private school doesn't mean they are going to get a guaranteed better education than a public education, it is totally up to the child to see that happens and I would put the public school teachers up against the private school teachers anyday.

 

I never said anything against a public school education....or teachers. I am a firm beliver that what makes a quality education is not limited to the following:

 

1> Whats put on the blackboard.... ciriculum ( a Senior taking Physics and Calculus is getting a better education than one who takes algebra II and consumer mathematics...)

 

2> Teachers... ( I will leave this subject as is..... I could explain many cases of outstanding examples) Im sure we all can.....

 

3> Environment => Including expectations for achievement, discipline and respect for other individuals and their property... Educational environment must be conducive for learning....

 

4> Facilities... In this day and age... the most advanced computers and science labs are necessary to prepare students for success in higher education.

 

5> Much like sports.... Students must be challenged. Students must work hard, very hard.... 2 - 3 hours of homework each day, minimum, 6 days a week.

 

These are just some thoughts based off of my experience and education. Again this is NOT an inclusive list.... However, I do challenge the public school system in that the great majority of its students are not completly and consistently subjected to the criteria standards (my suggestions) I have out lined above. I do believe there are some very good public schools and one can get a good education at these schools and any other... However, I think that the public school does not try to exploit the talents on all its students. Yes, I know they say they do, and they are supposed to, but really, when a kid come home from school for four years and never brings home a book.... ???????

4>

I don't know where you live, but we don't all have choices when it comes to where we send our kids to school.

You have a CHOICE every single day. To live where you live, to work where you work, to send your kids where they go. There is no gray area to the above statement.

You have a CHOICE every single day. To live where you live, to work where you work, to send your kids where they go. There is no gray area to the above statement.

Disagree. Unless you are including making a dumb choice.

 

For a good many people, their support system, their finances requires them to live in one place. Now, yes, they can give up every positive thing in their life to make a move to Louisville and have their child attend one of the Holy duo.

 

But that can be a very dumb choice if those things in their life is setup in a certain manner.

 

For example, a young man grows up in the family business, funeral home, in a small community. It is very successful. All of his family is in that small community. All the free babysitters/day care (family) that he would need are in that small community.

 

Now it is not possible for him to pick up the funeral home and move it 4-5 hours to Louisville. In addition, funeral home business is so much built on relationships and reputation that it is not feasible for him to start a new one in Louisville and expect to pick up right where he left off in the small community.

 

So, does he have a choice? Yes and no. Gray area. His situation, no he really doesn't unless he wants to make a really dumb decision. Yes, he could make a really dumb decision.

 

Gray area.

^ I am not even mentioning anyplace in particular. Nothing makes anyone live anywhere. You have choices. People died to give us such a liberty. I will be darned when some people who don't like where their kids' school finishes in standings, is going to dictate where my children go, and who they can compete against. My taxes pay for part of these kids' education, plus my own.

If your not pleased with the "Choices" of educational opportunity for your child then explore options.... consider moving to the nearest county which has an outstanding public school. Attend school board meetings and voice concerns and suggestions for improvement.... You see, there are options and choices. I for one just dont see pointing the finger at private schools as an option or a solution to the problem....

^ I am not even mentioning anyplace in particular. Nothing makes anyone live anywhere. You have choices. People died to give us such a liberty. I will be darned when some people who don't like where their kids' school finishes in standings, is going to dictate where my children go, and who they can compete against. My taxes pay for part of these kids' education, plus my own.

No one in any form or fashion that I recall reading has EVER indicated that the bolded would be acceptable.

Disagree. Unless you are including making a dumb choice.

 

For a good many people, their support system, their finances requires them to live in one place. Now, yes, they can give up every positive thing in their life to make a move to Louisville and have their child attend one of the Holy duo.

 

But that can be a very dumb choice if those things in their life is setup in a certain manner.

 

For example, a young man grows up in the family business, funeral home, in a small community. It is very successful. All of his family is in that small community. All the free babysitters/day care (family) that he would need are in that small community.

 

Now it is not possible for him to pick up the funeral home and move it 4-5 hours to Louisville. In addition, funeral home business is so much built on relationships and reputation that it is not feasible for him to start a new one in Louisville and expect to pick up right where he left off in the small community.

 

So, does he have a choice? Yes and no. Gray area. His situation, no he really doesn't unless he wants to make a really dumb decision. Yes, he could make a really dumb decision.

 

Gray area.

There is no grey area at all, just excuses that people put up. If a family gives up what you describe in order to move to a place where their children have better prospects for the future I would hardly call that a dumb decision. No one that moves and starts over picks up right where they left off and no one should expect to. If you choose to stay in an area with lesser schools because of a job or a support structure for your family that is a choice you make.

 

As one on my fellow posters said if the limited educational prospects in a certain area are a concern then move. If you choose to make a current job, family business, farm etc a priority then that is a choice you have made. Don't complain about the advantages a school (or system) in an urban area has when you choose to stay in a rural area.

 

No Grey Area

The world has blinders and in our society we all too often only see through the blinders on both sides of the issue.

 

I never complained about any educational issues. I never said I was unhappy with the educational issues.

 

If a school wants to be a pooling ground for athletes than fine. But don't ask schools who are not looking to go that route (and there is nothing, let me say it louder so I am not misunderstood...NOTHING...wrong with that) to compete with those that do.

 

You all complain that it waters down your championships. It that is such a worry, than you need to be concerned with the status of your present championships. Because you are winning against schools that have ADMITTED they can't compete with you and the resources you have being a private school. That's like a 4A school winning a 2A championship. Your beating up on people, or at least 190 some of them according to the vote in October, that have admitted they can't beat you on a year in and year out basis. You are presently winning a watered-down championship that you are so concerned about winning.

 

I say put the best of the best together. Let them all agree to abide by whatever guidelines they choose, open enrollment or not, recruiting or not, pulling from multiple counties or not. And then you have a true championship. Rather than beating up on schools that have admitted they cannot beat you on a year in and year out basis.

 

You guys make great politicians though. Stay the course!!!!!!!!!! You are right and everyone else is wrong.

 

And before you go too ballistic on me, remember I would vote in a heartbeat for a voucher system in this country AND my proposal from many months back DID NOT call for a straight private/public split.

What was the ultimate objective of the proposed realingment? From what I understand, in essence was to give more schools (public) a chance to win a state championship... Really, cut through all the discussion, recuriting etc. that to me was the real issue, Look at who's winning all the time....

 

Now the Accepted system for 2007 will have 6 classes.... How many schools outside of the top 10 that consistently win championships (all classes) will this benefit????? As in winning a championship..... I think the loss of revenue coupled with the increased cost associated with 6 classes will prove to be mistake for the medium and smaller school in all classes. It will not penialize the St. X's and Trinity's of Ky. It will penialize many schools that it is supposed to help........... As in all decisions for HS athletics, the kids need to come to thought befor any irrational decisions are made........

What was the ultimate objective of the proposed realingment? From what I understand, in essence was to give more schools (public) a chance to win a state championship... Really, cut through all the discussion, recuriting etc. that to me was the real issue, Look at who's winning all the time....

 

Now the Accepted system for 2007 will have 6 classes.... How many schools outside of the top 10 that consistently win championships (all classes) will this benefit????? As in winning a championship..... I think the loss of revenue coupled with the increased cost associated with 6 classes will prove to be mistake for the medium and smaller school in all classes. It will not penialize the St. X's and Trinity's of Ky. It will penialize many schools that it is supposed to help........... As in all decisions for HS athletics, the kids need to come to thought befor any irrational decisions are made........

I agree 100% with the bolded. Not sure I agree with the other part. It might happen, but I am not sure it will.

 

I do know for a fact that for the extra 100-200-300 kids that get to compete in a state football championship game that they otherwise would not have, it will be a great benefit and event in their life. And they won't care one iota if it was 4 or 6 classes.

I agree 100% with the bolded. Not sure I agree with the other part. It might happen, but I am not sure it will.

 

I do know for a fact that for the extra 100-200-300 kids that get to compete in a state football championship game that they otherwise would not have, it will be a great benefit and event in their life. And they won't care one iota if it was 4 or 6 classes.

 

Yes - I agree... But under the seceniro you describe, does it fullfill the objective of the push for realignment??? So we are to have 6 classes in football such that by chance, a smaller or medium size school (which has never won a championship) wins the title game. Great experience I agree... Now lets put that into perspective, we changed all HS football (teams , players etc) to benefit 50 kids at the max...... Why dont we just mail a state championship trophy to all schools..... that way everyone would feel special and would save a lot of money....................... I do not see this truly accomplishing anything. There will be more schools (students) to suffer than benefit from the new format. I believe the new format will not hurt the St. X's and Trinity's, they will still win their fair share of titles. So What have we accomplished????? All of the change, increased expenses, etc for the benefit of the possibility that someone is going to win a championship for the first time..........? I think we have lost perspective on the issue at hand...Kids....!!!!!!!!

Yes - I agree... But under the seceniro you describe, does it fullfill the objective of the push for realignment??? So we are to have 6 classes in football such that by chance, a smaller or medium size school (which has never won a championship) wins the title game. Great experience I agree... Now lets put that into perspective, we changed all HS football (teams , players etc) to benefit 50 kids at the max...... Why dont we just mail a state championship trophy to all schools..... that way everyone would feel special and would save a lot of money....................... I do not see this truly accomplishing anything. There will be more schools (students) to suffer than benefit from the new format. I believe the new format will not hurt the St. X's and Trinity's, they will still win their fair share of titles. So What have we accomplished????? All of the change, increased expenses, etc for the benefit of the possibility that someone is going to win a championship for the first time..........? I think we have lost perspective on the issue at hand...Kids....!!!!!!!!

The bolded argument has worn thin. That argument is similar to the argument where Republicans say we won't be safe if we vote Democrats and Democrats say the rich are the only to benefit when we vote Republican. It is an emotional argument aimed at creating a response with no true merit in the argument.

 

It is not just about state titles. Football is the ONLY sport that not every kid gets to participate in the postseason. My understanding now all will.

 

You will have more kids competing in a postseason tournament. You might have more upsets in the first round that will be as great an accomplishment for some schools as the state title would be for other schools. Pendleton beats Cov Cath and that is a great, great accomplishment. If they lose the next game, it will still be seen as a great season. Without the more classes, that opportunity might NEVER exist for some kids.

 

I am tired of the sanctity of sports being held to such a level that we try and keep the importance up there at the expense of kids. HS athletics is about what the kids learn and the opportunities they have. In the previous system, opportunities were limited and severely limited for some schools. Now, they all get an opportunity to participate in the postseason and the best team wins.

 

I have ZERO problem with adults getting their fragile egos stepped on when kids are getting an opportunities. But I guess that mindset is why I am a teacher. Putting kids in front of programs, egos, traditions or whatever else you want to call it.

I have never heard the reason for the restructuring to 6 classes based off of the interest to get more kids in the playoffs..... That explaination does not hold water with the reason for the push to the 6 class system. Now your points are valid, yet all the discussion Ive heard is based on more public schools winning championships (ie. unfair advantage for privates...) These are two separate issues and I think your getting them mixed.... If your point is the true essensce of the restructure.... then why dont we open the playoffs to all the team or the first 5 in each district???? See, that would solve your issue of more kids playing in post season.... Its much more involved that that...You may want to ask your Principal what his position is???? I realize that you probable have your own ideas, but the push from the state AD's and Principles was about "too many titles going to private schools"........ Hence the segregation push and 6 class compromise............

 

Lets play football, its that time of year.....

I have never heard the reason for the restructuring to 6 classes based off of the interest to get more kids in the playoffs..... That explaination does not hold water with the reason for the push to the 6 class system. Now your points are valid, yet all the discussion Ive heard is based on more public schools winning championships (ie. unfair advantage for privates...) These are two separate issues and I think your getting them mixed.... If your point is the true essensce of the restructure.... then why dont we open the playoffs to all the team or the first 5 in each district???? See, that would solve your issue of more kids playing in post season.... Its much more involved that that...You may want to ask your Principal what his position is???? I realize that you probable have your own ideas, but the push from the state AD's and Principles was about "too many titles going to private schools"........ Hence the segregation push and 6 class compromise............

 

Lets play football, its that time of year.....

Couple things:

1)Check your PM's. I sent you one concerning your first two statements and where I was given those points. I can say they were given to me by a person that was in this decision making process.

 

2)I believe the new classes will be opening it to all teams, won't it?

 

3)We have in detailed discussions LONG before last October on the "unlevel playing field."

 

4)I have long held that while that has gotten played up in the media, for many of the 190some schools that voted as they did, it was as much about district and regional titles as it was about state titles. For some schools, a district title is as exciting as a state title. And an equally difficult goal.

 

5)It is about more than just football.

 

6)6 class was being bandied about from my understanding and is not just a compromise of the public/private debate. I believe we might see something happen again this October concerning the public/private debate.

 

And it is that time of the year, let's tee it up and knock that drive straight down the middle of the fairway.

And I have argued that just because you send your child to a private school doesn't mean they are going to get a guaranteed better education than a public education, it is totally up to the child to see that happens and I would put the public school teachers up against the private school teachers anyday.

 

The largest difference makers are the parents and their interest in the kids classwork. A child may appreciate a private education. A child may prefer a public education. It's up to the parents. Not everyone watches their children's progress that closely at a private school. I do believe the percentage of parents involved in their child's education is greater at private schools. The kids who have a parent/guardian, etc looking after their success in the classroom will usually perform better than a child whose family situation may not offer them the same level of support.