Interesting article in the Ashland paper today. Further evidence that all public schools are not bound by their district boundries.

 

http://www.dailyindependent.com/local/local_story_021005056.html

As far as I know you can go to school anywhere you want as long as you don't care to pay $$$ for it and you can find your own way there. It's always been this way.

As far as I know you can go to school anywhere you want as long as you don't care to pay $$$ for it and you can find your own way there. It's always been this way.

Are you suggesting that all those students, referred to in that article ,who are going toa public school out of district are actually paying tuition?

Are you suggesting that all those students, referred to in that article ,who are going toa public school out of district are actually paying tuition?

 

 

If they live out of district, most likely. When my family moved out of the Ashland city limits during my junior year of high school, my parents payed to keep me at Blazer. That was some time ago, but I have no knowledge that it has changed.

Interesting article in the Ashland paper today. Further evidence that all public schools are not bound by their district boundries.

 

http://www.dailyindependent.com/local/local_story_021005056.html

In my opinion this is one of the main reasons they will never split publics and privates .Public schools with reciprocal agreements are getting students outside of their districts without those students having to pay tuition .

 

Putting public schools with these agreements and private schools in the same division and public schools without them{who charge full tuition for every student outside their district} in another division would be the only fair way to do it. However that would never be passed by the body of schools.

If they live out of district, most likely. When my family moved out of the Ashland city limits during my junior year of high school, my parents payed to keep me at Blazer. That was some time ago, but I have no knowledge that it has changed.

I know multiple students who attend a school out of their district and none of them pay to go there.

I guess when you moved you were living in a district that didnt have a reciprocal agreement with Ashland

I know multiple students who attend a school out of their district and none of them pay to go there.

I guess when you moved you were living in a district that didnt have a reciprocal agreement with Ashland

 

Not only are they not paying anything, but also the tax money allotted for them follows them to the "new" school. Thus, Ashland picks up a student-athlete living in Boyd County, not only do they get the student-athlete, they also get his tax money from the state. Pretty sweet deal.

 

I thought the article was interesting in what it didn't mention as well as what it did mention. There was no mention of transfers for athletic purposes. Interesting indeed because we all know it is a frequent occurrence around here.

 

Although one might refer to this as "mutual back scratching", the truth is that the independents seem to be the "scratchees" while the poor old county systems are the "scratchors". It reminds me of a partnership. However, as is evident in this, some partners pretty much flourish while others are merely along for the ride.

Not only are they not paying anything, but also the tax money allotted for them follows them to the "new" school. Thus, Ashland picks up a student-athlete living in Boyd County, not only do they get the student-athlete, they also get his tax money from the state. Pretty sweet deal.

 

 

If they don't pay the new school tuition, as you all have stated, why wouldn't the tax money follow them to their new school? Your suggesting that the 'new' school system educate these kids for free..? :confused:

As far as I know you can go to school anywhere you want as long as you don't care to pay $$$ for it and you can find your own way there. It's always been this way.

That sounds a whole lot like what people complain about with the private schools.

That sounds a whole lot like what people complain about with the private schools.

 

 

The difference is finding your way to school. If you live in Ohio and decide to enroll at Blazer, there is nothing stating you can't, as long as you pay tuition and the school isn't already full. However, Ashland can't send a bus/van/whatever to your doorstep to pick you up and take you home every day.

If they don't pay the new school tuition, as you all have stated, why wouldn't the tax money follow them to their new school? Your suggesting that the 'new' school system educate these kids for free..? :confused:

 

Your terminology is not accurate. It is not tuition. It is state allotted money.

The fact is that the family enrolling its children out of the district in which they live pay nothing whatsoever. In fact, the "new" school is encouraged to take them since a goodly treasure chest of greenbacks follow the "new" enrollee.

 

Therefore, the practice of leaving a county school system for an independent system is a great windfall for both the independent and for the "new" student and his/her family. Is there a villian in this process? No. However, there are some fools and they are clearly the county districts that go along with reciprocity to their own detriment.

The difference is finding your way to school. If you live in Ohio and decide to enroll at Blazer, there is nothing stating you can't, as long as you pay tuition and the school isn't already full. However, Ashland can't send a bus/van/whatever to your doorstep to pick you up and take you home every day.

 

Actually, if the "new" student had a special "talent" to add to the system, I feel sure that either transportation would be located or that the family would find lodging in Ashland. It has certainly happened in the past and there is no reason to believe it wouldn't happen again.

Most private schools don't provide for transportation of ANY students and ALL students have to find a way to school. Is it by rule or by choice that transportation is not provided?

 

My question is would the Ashland people have gotten their bloomers all in a bunch like they did if Mayo had provided his own transportation to school? According to you there would have been nothing different then. Somehow I suspect that there would have still been wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Your terminology is not accurate. It is not tuition. It is state allotted money.

The fact is that the family enrolling its children out of the district in which they live pay nothing whatsoever. In fact, the "new" school is encouraged to take them since a goodly treasure chest of greenbacks follow the "new" enrollee.

 

Therefore, the practice of leaving a county school system for an independent system is a great windfall for both the independent and for the "new" student and his/her family. Is there a villian in this process? No. However, there are some fools and they are clearly the county districts that go along with reciprocity to their own detriment.

 

 

Im more confused now than I was before reading your post.

 

You get state alloted money based on students enrolled at your school, correct? So wouldn't it only make sense that if a student does not enroll at Boyd County and does enroll at Ashland, that Ashland would get the money?

 

In other words, what Im saying is if a student enrolls at Ashland and their parents do not have to pay the Ashland School System anything for doing so, wouldn't it only make sense that the state pays for it? Otherwise Ashland would be educating the kid for free.

Of course, the other side of that is that I, as one who pays school tax to the Ashland schools, am paying for the education of out of district Ashland students whose parents are paying nothing to have their children in the Ashland system.

 

The bottom line is that, if you publics aren't upset about all this musical chairs among your own, don't whine about privates attracting out of area students. To be other than hypocritical, you will need to be consistent. Of course, we won't hold our breath on that one. And, by the way, all of this applies to athletes since, in fact, they are a material part of the reciprocity practice.