I agree. We disagree. However, to call it an overreaction is a little self serving don't you think?

You know, the private schools may be able to weed thru the "Oranges", but they miss the boat on a lot of good very intelligent students whose parents can't afford a private education.

From the overreaction of Silver Shadow and bulldog77, I would say that I unintentionally hit a couple of nerves. I always heard that, when that happens, you have hit too close to home.

 

Sorry, boys, I still stand by the thesis of my posts so I guess maybe we should just agree to disagree. However, it is good to see such staunch public school defenders.

 

I should mention that, for the benefit of bulldog77, I have a long history in public education at all levels from the middle school to the public college. My service covers all areas from teacher to coach to administrator to school board member to, most important of all, involved parent. My colleagues at the college level continually bemoan the fact that, each year, students from Kentucky public schools are less and less prepared for college. If you doubt it, check out the emphasis most public colleges must put on remedial courses. Many students, I am told, must take three remedial math classes before they can even take College Algebra. The path to taking English Composition is quite similar.

 

So, bulldog77, either the college professors that I know well are teaching at schools that only attract the very poorest of students or the public schools are not doing a particularly good job. From personal knowledge, I conclude it is the latter.

 

For this quandry, I do not blame the public school teachers. I blame those who actually make the decisions in the Department of Education and in our colleges of education.

 

One more example, if I may? The level of knowledge of students in the area of English Grammar is embarrassing. Of course, in our modern day of hyped test scores for reward, our English teachers are not trained in English Grammar. It is the blind leading the blind. It is a shame.

 

This is too easy.

 

I hear all day long how colleges are failing to graduate a quality hire for business. So who is failing who? The college level has admission standards, so what is this group of ivory tower residents doing with their day? Students come in meeting your very own guidelines and when they graduate they are unprepared for the workforce. Who sits in judgement of who?

 

Overreation? and you question the standards of English grammer? How about fictional writing? Seems to be strength for you.

You know, the private schools may be able to weed thru the "Oranges", but they miss the boat on a lot of good very intelligent students whose parents can't afford a private education.

 

I think that the anti-public/anit-private sentiment is getting out of hand.

 

Both public and private schools have:

 

1) Great teachers

2) Great Students

3) A place in society.

 

It doesn't have to be, nor should it be, an "us against them" sentimantality.

 

Private schools do not miss the boat on anything by being exclusionary. The private schools that I'm affiliated with would love to be able to offer more assistance, and strive to make it as affordable as possible for their students. They don't strive to be elitist, as so many imply. They offer learning programs for learning disabled, and work dilligently to foster an inclusionary, rather than exclusionary environment for all their students.

 

There are benefits to either choice.

 

The most disturbing by-product of this whole athletic debate is the mudslinging that's occuring on both sides of the debate. There's a lot of misinformation, and it's really disheartening.

I think that the anti-public/anit-private sentiment is getting out of hand.

 

Both public and private schools have:

 

1) Great teachers

2) Great Students

3) A place in society.

 

It doesn't have to be, nor should it be, an "us against them" sentimantality.

 

Private schools do not miss the boat on anything by being exclusionary. The private schools that I'm affiliated with would love to be able to offer more assistance, and strive to make it as affordable as possible for their students. They don't strive to be elitist, as so many imply. They offer learning programs for learning disabled, and work dilligently to foster an inclusionary, rather than exclusionary environment for all their students.

 

There are benefits to either choice.

 

The most disturbing by-product of this whole athletic debate is the mudslinging that's occuring on both sides of the debate. There's a lot of misinformation, and it's really disheartening.

 

I agree that both sides have great programs and great students and teachers and all of that. I am just saying that there are some families with truly gifted children and in most situations when finances come into play those kids end up at public schools, its just the way it is. McCallie TN in Chattanooga I am hearing is $25,000 per year. I just don't know how a family could afford something like that without some kind of financial assistance or scholarship for their child.

I agree that both sides have great programs and great students and teachers and all of that. I am just saying that there are some families with truly gifted children and in most situations when finances come into play those kids end up at public schools, its just the way it is.

 

That's true. But, I also know that many truly gifted children benefit from some of the programs offered through public schools that aren't offered in private schools. So, in the end, I think you do the best you can do or are willing to do, in your own circumstances. :thumb:

That's true. But, I also know that many truly gifted children benefit from some of the programs offered through public schools that aren't offered in private schools. So, in the end, I think you do the best you can do or are willing to do, in your own circumstances. :thumb:

 

 

 

And this is precisely where this portion of the debate should end. We are really talking here about EXTRA-CURRICULAR activities, not he education of our youth. This debate REALLY isn't about choice, or educational opportunity, or even about class, it's about whether or not you, as a school district choose to compete in an unbalanced system or you choose not to. I have never minded the system as is because it reflects the real world to me. NO competition is ever equal or balanced. This, to me, is a basic life lesson. To others who believe all competition on an amateur level should be based in their perception of fairness, think unbalanced competition is inherantly wrong. Public schools shouldn't have to "take it or leave it" as the most current communication from the private school advocates suggests. There should be and has to be common ground and unfortunately the private schools are in the position where they would have to make the most movement toward compromise due to the inherent limitations and demands placed on all public schools. Until more level heads prevail in the leadership of the two sides, this gnashing of teeth and pulling of hair will continue.

This is too easy.

 

I hear all day long how colleges are failing to graduate a quality hire for business. So who is failing who? The college level has admission standards, so what is this group of ivory tower residents doing with their day? Students come in meeting your very own guidelines and when they graduate they are unprepared for the workforce. Who sits in judgement of who?

 

Overreation? and you question the standards of English grammer? How about fictional writing? Seems to be strength for you.

 

Your level of indignation is only surpassed by your lack of knowledge as to how colleges work. You need a remedial course in College Admissions 001.

Your level of indignation is only surpassed by your lack of knowledge as to how colleges work. You need a remedial course in College Admissions 001.

 

I believe the deja vu (heard it before) word is "OVERREATION" and "TO CLOSE TO HOME".

 

Thanks for the help in proving a point.

And this is precisely where this portion of the debate should end. We are really talking here about EXTRA-CURRICULAR activities, not he education of our youth. This debate REALLY isn't about choice, or educational opportunity, or even about class, it's about whether or not you, as a school district choose to compete in an unbalanced system or you choose not to. I have never minded the system as is because it reflects the real world to me. NO competition is ever equal or balanced. This, to me, is a basic life lesson. To others who believe all competition on an amateur level should be based in their perception of fairness, think unbalanced competition is inherantly wrong. Public schools shouldn't have to "take it or leave it" as the most current communication from the private school advocates suggests. There should be and has to be common ground and unfortunately the private schools are in the position where they would have to make the most movement toward compromise due to the inherent limitations and demands placed on all public schools. Until more level heads prevail in the leadership of the two sides, this gnashing of teeth and pulling of hair will continue.

 

I think that the private schools have offered to move in these discussions. What they won't agree to is any system that cuts off the ability of families to make the choice that they decide is best for their family. I don't see how anyone can ask them to do that. The same geographic open door that is used by the private schools is available to every public school district in this state. Many, if not most, choose not to use it. That's why the private schools have pushed so hard for strict enforcement of the rules. There are very good reasons why 13 or 14 year olds should not be the objects of athletic recruiting. If schools violate the rules, punishment should be swift and severe.

 

I would also like to comment on those that justify private schools by disparaging public schools. It isn't the way to approach this debate. I don't want to have to prove that public schools are bad in order to justify sending my kids to a private school. The logical extension of that argument is that on the day that public schools become good schools, (and most already are), private schools no longer need to exist. That isn't right. Instead, how about supporting education to try to make ALL schools better.

As far as the original question, two that I have talked to have said yes.

As far as the original question, two that I have talked to have said yes.

 

Wow, if it can be proven, he is not the most intelligent person around.

I believe the deja vu (heard it before) word is "OVERREATION" and "TO CLOSE TO HOME".

 

Thanks for the help in proving a point.

 

You are welcome and I will gratiously allow you to bail out of this one.

It really is an ignorant, ignorant statement, and it really baffles me how anyone could possibly feel that a county owns a kid, baffles me...are we in slave times>

Ask the state. A kid's ADA money that the state provides for their education is tied to the school district they live in. NO OTHER SCHOOL CAN RECEIVE THAT MONEY, unless the kid's home school says it is okay. They say it is not okay, the kid does not attend his school district determined by the state and the money stays with the state of KY.

 

Great question is where does the money go that is not sent to the districts for a kid who did not attend school in the district he lives. That I do not know. Just know it does not go to the local district.

^ I understand the current setup of the state sending my money for my kid to the DISTRICT school...I am just saying that it is un-American in every facet of the word.