Sorry, I don't buy this. A method to provide strict enforcement was offered by the privates and the publics voted it down. I think any gripe the publics had went out the door with that vote. I believe in very strong enforcement. I wish everyone did.

 

Just like the privates voted down the "Sphere of Influence" idea where there were boundries set for private schools.

Example:I remember a vote that they also ignored not so long ago.

 

My gripe is that publics have to play against privates when it is this easy to do these type things, then when it happens we just have to live with it. And this doen't happen in the public school. NO SCHOLARSHIPS.......

But the seperation vote was not ignored. The Supreme Court(Board of Control) of the KHSAA, just for lack of a better phrase, determined that it was "unconstitutional". Happens in US just as well.

 

The vote for more inforcement was not ignored, just not passed.

 

And there are no legal athletic scholarships in Private Schools, I assume that's what you mean.

Sorry, I don't buy this. A method to provide strict enforcement was offered by the privates and the publics voted it down. I think any gripe the publics had went out the door with that vote. I believe in very strong enforcement. I wish everyone did.

 

I'm not saying that I voted against the resolution, or have any influence with the people who did. But, to say that all publics don't want stricter enforcement, is like people saying that all private school cheat. You can't use broad generalizations and expect people to take you seriously.

I'm not saying that I voted against the resolution, or have any influence with the people who did. But, to say that all publics don't want stricter enforcement, is like people saying that all private school cheat. You can't use broad generalizations and expect people to take you seriously.

 

I wish you would point out where I said that ALL publics don't want stricter enforcement. The publics, as a group, voted it down. Read what people say and I'll take you seriously.

Just like the privates voted down the "Sphere of Influence" idea where there were boundries set for private schools.

 

First of all, there aren't enough private schools to be able to control any delegate bill to vote it down. Second, all of the Catholic schools do have boundaries, though they are larger than one county, as will and can be pointed out. I can't speak for non-Catholic private schools and whatever boundaries they may or may not have. Trinity Alums point may be this: A bill for stronger enforcemnt was voted down, and people still complain about how the KHSAA doesn't do enough.

 

I think that the boundary issue is not a public private thing, as we all know, any school district boundary is a self imposed (by the school district) limitation. Now there are issues with tuition for OOD students, or reciprocal agreements, or the fact that open enrollment would mean nothing at some schools.

I wish you would point out where I said that ALL publics don't want stricter enforcement. The publics, as a group, voted it down. Read what people say and I'll take you seriously.

 

OK, your right, I'm wrong.

I'm not saying that I voted against the resolution, or have any influence with the people who did. But, to say that all publics don't want stricter enforcement, is like people saying that all private school cheat. You can't use broad generalizations and expect people to take you seriously.

 

When the vote for the proposal to insure stricter enforcement by forming an independent enforcement division was voted down on almost "party" lines and the public mouthpiece for the publics was adamantly opposed to it you can certainly say that MOST public schools don't want it.

But the seperation vote was not ignored. The Supreme Court(Board of Control) of the KHSAA, just for lack of a better phrase, determined that it was "unconstitutional". Happens in US just as well.

 

The vote for more inforcement was not ignored, just not passed.

 

And there are no legal athletic scholarships in Private Schools, I assume that's what you mean.

 

Call it what you want, an athlete that recieves a scholarship to attend a private school.

How much do public school students pay to attend school?

How much do public school students pay to attend school?

 

Or for their books, or transportation...

You are free to go to public.

And I did.

 

But you didn't answer the question.

 

How much does it cost to go to a public school?

How much do public school students pay to attend school?

 

What does that have to do with anything. I can't get a scholarship for tuition in a public school. So don't go there.

Terp you have hit the nail on the head.

 

Unfortunately, what you may have discovered is that "those types of families" ARE special. And having many of those types of families, but more so NOT having the other kind of families (the ones that don't care) IS a very big advantage. IMO, it is what creates the "us vs. them" mentality.

 

I don't know that anyone is doing anything wrong in "having" that advantage, but I do know that there are a good many schools that wish they were stuck with less of the types of families that do nothing, and more of the type that are more involved.

 

It is also my opinion that having these types of people continually involved with the school serves to reenforce the school monetarily, much like a small liberal arts college, which in the long run gives them another advantage over other schools.

 

In the end, I don't think anyone is necessarily wrong here. I also am quite sure that the "playing field" is not even, and has not been for some time. Some of those "advantages" cannot be changed, and create the ability to have more success than your average public school.

 

 

I was with you until the last paragraph as I do think those "advantages" can be changed. I wish the public administrators, rather than pushing for a split, would take your above observations to a meeting of all parents of kids attending the public schools and say look: "if you want your kids to be as successful on the field and in the classroom as the kids at the private schools are, then you need to start doing the things the parents at the private schools are doing. You need to get involved in the school; you need to demand your kids pay attention and work hard in the classroom; you need to support us monetarily; you need to support us when we have to discipline your child, not sue us; you need to volunteer at athletic events; you need to find ways to get your kids to and from summer conditioning sessions and encourage him to attend; you need to pressure us for change when the coaches we've hired aren't getting it done; ect. And if you don't do those things, you will be the reason your children do not succeed; not the private schools and I'll be danged if I'm going to participate in any effort to punish the privates when they are the ones doing things right and we're not. That's called lowering the bar folks and I'm not for it."

I was with you until the last paragraph as I do think those "advantages" can be changed. I wish the public administrators, rather than pushing for a split, would take your above observations to a meeting of all parents of kids attending the public schools and say look: "if you want your kids to be as successful on the field and in the classroom as the kids at the private schools are, then you need to start doing the things the parents at the private schools are doing. You need to get involved in the school; you need to demand your kids pay attention and work hard in the classroom; you need to support us monetarily; you need to support us when we have to discipline your child, not sue us; you need to volunteer at athletic events; you need to find ways to get your kids to and from summer conditioning sessions and encourage him to attend; you need to pressure us for change when the coaches we've hired aren't getting it done; ect. And if you don't do those things, you will be the reason your children do not succeed; not the private schools and I'll be danged if I'm going to participate in any effort to punish the privates when they are the ones doing things right and we're not. That's called lowering the bar folks and I'm not for it."

 

I could not agree more, leatherneck. :thumb::ylsuper: