You seem to think it would be a "meat market" with the meat being kids. I think you are missing the boat. The meat would be the schools trying to sell themselves (in the market) to families. That would be a GREAT thing! The schools would be FORCED to improve.

Please join the debate about this in the thread in General Discussion.

 

Schools would not necessarily be forced to improve. They could simply drop their BD program and say go to school B who does offer that. School B could be an hour away.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

 

Does everyone see the similarities? I think a strong case could be made for Wilsonism.:scared:

Do you have children? Did you ever think they were doing something wrong but couldn't prove it at the time? And later on, it came out that they were doing something wrong. Were you a McCarthyist?

Admittingly, I am ignorant on my next question's answer. How would the whistleblower protection fall into your point?

 

The whistleblowing protection idea is built around those who face retaliation from, in most cases, their employer for making a complaint against that employer. It wouldn't have any application in this situation. There are too many presently making complaints to KHSAA without any degree of accountability. The accused has a right to know who is doing the accusing particularly since a few of our schools are treated as guilty until proven innocent.

Do you have children? Did you ever think they were doing something wrong but couldn't prove it at the time? And later on, it came out that they were doing something wrong. Were you a McCarthyist?

This is a great, great thread topic. Do we want to bring competition into schools and make that a meat market where schools are trying to win over the consumer?

 

Probably shouldn't start that here but is the foundation of this whole debate in public/private. Some are holding on to schools as faces of communities, while others are thrusting schools into the free market society. Kinda like when the mom/pop stores were/are being run out by the Walmarts.

 

Would be an interesting thread, maybe more in line of General Discussion.

 

 

To answer your question, yes. Call it a meat market if you want to, but secondary education in today's global economy is way too important to worry about preserving the "faces of the community". Watch Happy Days reruns for that warm and fuzzy feeling if you want , but we have to do better in educating our high schoolers, and if a kid can get a better education at Beechwood (because all of its supposed advantages) than some other school, then we need more kids to attend high school at Beechwood. If that results in some other school losing students and getting less ADA money, so be it. If the communities want to preserve their "face", then they'll have to put up or shut up. If they put up, competition will have improved them. If they don't put up, then their high school face will eventually go the way of the dinosaur.

A couple of years ago, the KHSAA was investigating a complaint from a school system south of Jefferson County, I believe it was Meade. It seems a mailer talking about the benefits of a Catholic education in Jefferson County including the athletic programs was sent to the best MS girls basketball player in the county. She was a 7th grader. No other MS basketball player, boy or girl, received the mailer. Her father was a Baptist (I think that was the denomination) minister.

 

So, no Catholic connection. Doesn't live in Jefferson County. Not all students in that area received it.

 

Seems pretty obvious it was sent specifically to her and for athletic purposes. But how do you prove that?

 

But the KHSAA could do nothing because they had NO WAY to prove who sent it. How would the proposed investigation unit that is bandied by the private school supporters have changed this situation? I don't see how. And don't see how you could stop this.

 

I fully understand and SUPPORT the privates right to recruit students. And ON BOTH SIDES when you have adults who will not follow the rules, sometimes they are just not enforceable.

 

The mailing mentioned by ladiesbballcoach is the infamous one that has been seen on TV being waved in the air by Superintendent Sears. For those who think facts are important here are some related to that mailing. If you aren’t interested in facts then skip this post.

 

1. This mailing was first mentioned in a public setting when non-public schools were called to KHSAA headquarters for an unspecified meeting. Fifty plus people sat in the audience while members of the KHSAA special task force sat at a conference table. At some point in the meeting one of the committee members mentioned this mailing. Representatives from Louisville girls’ schools immediately said that they did not send it and wanted to see it.

 

2. Come to find out it was a direct mail piece published by the Archdiocese of Louisville that was sent to more than 3,000 households in Jefferson and surrounding counties (the Archdiocese comprises 20+ counties in central Kentucky). It was sent to several hundred households in Meade County alone. The brochure has been sent for many years and will be again this year. The Archdiocese buys a mailing list of households with school aged children. The brochure is not school-specific or program specific. Anyone interested in seeing this year’s version should contact the Archdiocese of Louisville’s Office for Lifelong Formation and Education.

 

3. It is the same type of literature sent by JCPS to households with school-aged children. While some outside the metropolitan area may think this is all very strange (along with the billboards, radio and TV ads, and large central Open House held each year by JCPS) that is the nature of education in this community that has more than 40 high schools and nearly 200 elementary and middle schools. Schools and school systems advertise their offerings and programs.

 

4. This matter has been clearly explained to the KHSAA and the superintendent of Meade County schools. There is nothing illegal about the mailing. It does not violate By-law 10 in spirit or letter. The KHSAA found no violation.

 

 

Even though this mailing has been explained to folks like Superintendent Sears, he and others continue to bring it up as if it is some kind of smoking gun. Call such tactics what you want. The word disingenuous comes to mind. It is exactly this type of rhetoric that clouds this entire issue.

The mailing mentioned by ladiesbballcoach is the infamous one that has been seen on TV being waved in the air by Superintendent Sears. For those who think facts are important here are some related to that mailing. If you aren’t interested in facts then skip this post.

 

1. This mailing was first mentioned in a public setting when non-public schools were called to KHSAA headquarters for an unspecified meeting. Fifty plus people sat in the audience while members of the KHSAA special task force sat at a conference table. At some point in the meeting one of the committee members mentioned this mailing. Representatives from Louisville girls’ schools immediately said that they did not send it and wanted to see it.

 

2. Come to find out it was a direct mail piece published by the Archdiocese of Louisville that was sent to more than 3,000 households in Jefferson and surrounding counties (the Archdiocese comprises 20+ counties in central Kentucky). It was sent to several hundred households in Meade County alone. The brochure has been sent for many years and will be again this year. The Archdiocese buys a mailing list of households with school aged children. The brochure is not school-specific or program specific. Anyone interested in seeing this year’s version should contact the Archdiocese of Louisville’s Office for Lifelong Formation and Education.

 

3. It is the same type of literature sent by JCPS to households with school-aged children. While some outside the metropolitan area may think this is all very strange (along with the billboards, radio and TV ads, and large central Open House held each year by JCPS) that is the nature of education in this community that has more than 40 high schools and nearly 200 elementary and middle schools. Schools and school systems advertise their offerings and programs.

 

4. This matter has been clearly explained to the KHSAA and the superintendent of Meade County schools. There is nothing illegal about the mailing. It does not violate By-law 10 in spirit or letter. The KHSAA found no violation.

 

 

Even though this mailing has been explained to folks like Superintendent Sears, he and others continue to bring it up as if it is some kind of smoking gun. Call such tactics what you want. The word disingenuous comes to mind. It is exactly this type of rhetoric that clouds this entire issue.

Thank you for clearing this matter up. I will remove it from my discussions on the matter.

Thank you for clearing this matter up. I will remove it from my discussions on the matter.

 

 

Very honorable approach LBBC.

 

Unfortunately, this little example is way too prevalent in the high school athletic arena these days.

 

Way too much bad, misleading and false information is being thrown around by people to try to skewer people's thoughts on the public private debate.

 

Back to my point earlier, if you don't have proof that it occurred, then don't believe it occurred.

 

And contrary to what people think, when the KHSAA does receive a complaint, they do as thorough of a job investigating it as they can do.

To answer your question, yes. Call it a meat market if you want to, but secondary education in today's global economy is way too important to worry about preserving the "faces of the community". Watch Happy Days reruns for that warm and fuzzy feeling if you want , but we have to do better in educating our high schoolers, and if a kid can get a better education at Beechwood (because all of its supposed advantages) than some other school, then we need more kids to attend high school at Beechwood. If that results in some other school losing students and getting less ADA money, so be it. If the communities want to preserve their "face", then they'll have to put up or shut up. If they put up, competition will have improved them. If they don't put up, then their high school face will eventually go the way of the dinosaur.

 

 

 

ABSOLUTELY!!!

 

Competition breeds excellence!!!!!!!

ABSOLUTELY!!!

 

Competition breeds excellence!!!!!!!

 

Explain the Pirates with how many consectutive losing seasons? They compete but would not be described as excellence.

Explain the Pirates with how many consectutive losing seasons? They compete but would not be described as excellence.

 

As leatherneck explained, teams/schools either step up or they go away.

 

In a school's case, either they step up and do better, or the administrators/ coaches making the decisions go away.

 

Pittsburgh may lose their baseball team to another city if they don't get better and start drawing fans, although the new stadium put this off for awhile. Also managers and GM's have lost their jobs over the years.

 

When excellence isn't attained, people lose their jobs.

a) Recruiting is defined as an act, on behalf of or for

the benefit of, a school, which attempts to influence a

student to transfer to a member school for the purpose

of participating in athletics. Such also includes influencing

a student to remain at a school. A school official utilizing

an intermediary, such as, but not limited to a peer,

another school employee, a student, a parent or a

citizen, for the purpose of recruiting a student athlete

shall be in noncompliance.

 

A couple of people have mentioned the above two points but it has gone relatively unnoticed. Before we try to make this bylaw so wide-sweeping, we need to make sure we understand the meaning of the two bolded parts of the above section of the bylaw.

 

1) That the influence used on said student to attend School A must have been done "for the purpose of athletics" and

 

2) That it was done by someone at the direction of a school official. This implies that the school official is utilizing someone else (peer, another school employee, a student, a parent or a citizen) to "recruit" (defined above) that student.

 

So no, general conversations between players on AAU teams, parents of players of School A, teachers, etc., would not be considered recruiting unless the conversation was both 1) athletically motivated AND 2) under direction of a school official who was utilizing the person making the pitch.

 

 

 

On the flip side, if there were such a person (booster, parent, etc.) who was out there making it a habit to go out of their way and recruit kids for athletics, and the school officials found out about it, then they have the responsibility to put a stop to it. Otherwise, it would fall under the second point of being utilitzed for that purpose whether the school official was directing the person or not.

As leatherneck explained, teams/schools either step up or they go away.

 

In a school's case, either they step up and do better, or the administrators/ coaches making the decisions go away.

 

Pittsburgh may lose their baseball team to another city if they don't get better and start drawing fans, although the new stadium put this off for awhile. Also managers and GM's have lost their jobs over the years.

 

When excellence isn't attained, people lose their jobs.

 

So, any team that does not win, it is because the coaches and administrators didn't do a good enough job? We are back to the public school coaches don't work hard enough argument, huh?

 

And that is the biggest load of crap that has been put forth in this argument.

 

If a team goes to state with 3 starters over 6'5" and a few years later they do not go to state with no starter over 6'2", is that the coaches fault?

So, any team that does not win, it is because the coaches and administrators didn't do a good enough job? We are back to the public school coaches don't work hard enough argument, huh?

 

And that is the biggest load of crap that has been put forth in this argument.

 

If a team goes to state with 3 starters over 6'5" and a few years later they do not go to state with no starter over 6'2", is that the coaches fault?

 

Honestly, IMO that 'argument' is only legit in football because you are playing against schools with a similar enrollment. To think Silver Grove can't beat Holmes because Holmes 'works harder' is not a fair argument...JMO

 

I'm not saying it isn't true in a lot of situations, just not all situations...

Honestly, IMO that 'argument' is only legit in football because you are playing against schools with a similar enrollment. To think Silver Grove can't beat Holmes because Holmes 'works harder' is not a fair argument...JMO

 

I think we are agreeing. Sometimes, in basketball, players determine the success. I have a girls team of 6'5", 6'2", 6'1", I am going to win a bunch of games against teams that go 5'8", 5'9" and 5'10", no matter how hard they work.

 

Girls fastpitch, Ryle has had a tremendous amount of success and they deserve to be rewarded for that success. But that pitcher does not move in from Kansas or whereever, I don't think they work any less. I don't think they practice easier. I don't think that the coach would not work as hard. But I do think, in fastpitch, that one dominate pitcher makes up for a lot of deficiencies in other areas.

 

If you have one dominate pitcher this year, will you win a bunch of games? Will you work any harder or easier whether you have that pitcher or not? If you don't win regional, is it because you didn't work hard enough?