By home-schooling their child, those parents have essentially said, "the public school is not good enough to educate my child." Since they made that choice, they also choose to forego the other extracurricular benefits the school provides.

 

Couldn't agree more. They have rec leagues if the kids want to play.

Couldn't agree more. They have rec leagues if the kids want to play.

 

That's where AAU leagues shine.

 

There is a National Homeschool Basketball Tournament in Oklahoma.

 

http://www.homeschoolbasketball.com/

By home-schooling their child, those parents have essentially said, "the public school is not good enough to educate my child." Since they made that choice, they also choose to forego the other extracurricular benefits the school provides.

 

What if you live in an area where that is literally true? It could be that your child has a learning disability, or that your child is not challenged enough. Is the responsibility of the parent that is qualified to homeschool that child to put him/her in an enviornment where their needs aren't being met? Or is it to take the child's education into their own hands. I think that there's a perception out there that parents who choose to homeschool their children are elitists. Those I've met who've chosen to do so, have done so out of concern for their child, not because they're too good for public education.

Schools don't exist to provide athletic teams for students - they exist to provide an education. The atletic and extra curricular activities are for those who attend the school. I don't think a parent who home schools would teach students from the school just because it would be good for some students -so by the same token why should home schooled children expect to participate in the school activities.

 

We have to remember this issue isn't about a few students replacing a few students on a team - it is about the big picture. You abide by the choices you make. I have been around several families that home school. Most of the time the children are very prepared. The only thing they seem to struggle in is tolerance of those who have different views from theirs.

Students attending public schools have no right to be educated by a homeshooling parent because they do nothing to support that parent's household. The same cannot be said of parents who homeschool their children. Their children have the right to an education in a public school, if they so choose, and that education includes the extracurricular activities sponsored by the school with tax dollars.

 

IMO, it is petty for the people who run public schools to deny the opportunity for homeschoolers to participate on school sponsored teams. As I said in a previous thread, schools should welcome the opportunity to provide a positive public school experience to home schooled children. Doing so benefits the community as a whole, whether or not the parents decide that the public school is not so bad after all as a result of that experience.

Edited January 22, 200917 yr by Ram
Rule 2

That is too bad. Not surprising but disappointing just the same.

 

Not disappointing at all. The disappointment is the very body - Senate should think they can continue to dictate what everyone else should do. It is silly to continue to suggest schools are so bad academically but OK athletically but it is OK to live in the area in question. It does not make any sense at all. This debate is being painted that schools are not worthy of academic consideration but we want the flexibility to use it on Friday night(s). That, my friends is not what you can build a team or program on.

Students attending public schools have no right to be educated by a homeshooling parent because they do nothing to support that parent's household. The same cannot be said of parents who homeschool their children. Their children have the right to an education in a public school, if they so choose, and that education includes the extracurricular activities sponsored by the school with tax dollars.

 

IMO, it is petty for the people who run public schools to deny the opportunity for homeschoolers to participate on school sponsored teams. As I said in a previous thread, schools should welcome the opportunity to provide a positive public school experience to home schooled children. Doing so benefits the community as a whole, whether or not the parents decide that the public school is not so bad after all as a result of that experience.

 

It is not petty. Given the cuts and extra costs schools are having to add and be burdened with it is grossly unfair to expect an expansion of convenience to a few. Enroll at the school, there is no way it is that bad.

What if you live in an area where that is literally true? It could be that your child has a learning disability, or that your child is not challenged enough. Is the responsibility of the parent that is qualified to homeschool that child to put him/her in an enviornment where their needs aren't being met? Or is it to take the child's education into their own hands. I think that there's a perception out there that parents who choose to homeschool their children are elitists. Those I've met who've chosen to do so, have done so out of concern for their child, not because they're too good for public education.

 

I cannot think of one instance where a learning disability can be better served in a home school environment over the mandated services for disabilities. I can think of and know several instances where home schooling was a discipline dodge.

Like I have said before, you can have anything you want, but you can't have it all.

 

 

Well said! If you don't want to be a part of the school system's classrooms, then you shouldn't be a part of their extra-curricular groups.

 

With that being said, my children attend a private, religious school AND I really admire most people who home-school their children.

 

Also, what about liability and insurance issues for children who are not enrolled at your school?

By home-schooling their child, those parents have essentially said, "the public school is not good enough to educate my child." Since they made that choice, they also choose to forego the other extracurricular benefits the school provides.

Absolutlely NOT!!!

 

Alot of parents choose home-schooling because they want an education for their child based on Christian values.

 

Alot of parents choose home-schooling because there kid is always in trouble at school and they are tired of dealing with it and they pull them out and homeschool them. Or at least sign it up that way.

 

Alot of parents choose home-schooling because they don't want their child exposed on a DAILY basis to the fights, sex, drugs, etc, etc that is going on with the teenagers today.

I am too the point that athletics should be 100% completely removed from schools. Take the money funding it and put it into stand alone athletic programs representing the counties/communities without it tied to the schools.

What if you live in an area where that is literally true? It could be that your child has a learning disability, or that your child is not challenged enough. Is the responsibility of the parent that is qualified to homeschool that child to put him/her in an enviornment where their needs aren't being met? Or is it to take the child's education into their own hands. I think that there's a perception out there that parents who choose to homeschool their children are elitists. Those I've met who've chosen to do so, have done so out of concern for their child, not because they're too good for public education.

 

It all comes down to choice, just like with private schools. They have made the choice that the public school does not fit their needs -- whatever those needs may be.

 

They still have the choice that if athletics is that important, they can send them to a school that has athletics. Seems pretty simple to me.

Absolutlely NOT!!!

 

Alot of parents choose home-schooling because they want an education for their child based on Christian values.

 

Then send them to a school that shares those values.

 

Alot of parents choose home-schooling because there kid is always in trouble at school and they are tired of dealing with it and they pull them out and homeschool them. Or at least sign it up that way.

 

If they're that much of a discipline problem, why should a coach have to put up with them?

 

Alot of parents choose home-schooling because they don't want their child exposed on a DAILY basis to the fights, sex, drugs, etc, etc that is going on with the teenagers today.

 

Then that's the sacrifice they make. It's all about what the parents' priorities. If they want the kid to play sports, you have to take the bitter with the sweet.

Then send them to a school that shares those values.

 

 

 

If they're that much of a discipline problem, why should a coach have to put up with them?

 

 

 

Then that's the sacrifice they make. It's all about what the parents' priorities. If they want the kid to play sports, you have to take the bitter with the sweet.

 

I wasn't addressing the thread title but your comment about a poor public school was the reason for home schooling.

 

And sometimes there is not a private school that shares their values. In the area of Mason, Bracken, Pendleton, Harrison, Nicholas, Fleming, there is not a Christian, non-Catholic private school as a choice. They would have to go to Lexington for Lex Christian, NKY for Calvary Christian or Ashland for Rose Hill.

 

Your middle point is one of the strongest reasons for not allowing home schoolers to play. No accountablility with them not being in school both academically and behavorial.

I wasn't addressing the thread title but your comment about a poor public school was the reason for home schooling.

 

And sometimes there is not a private school that shares their values. In the area of Mason, Bracken, Pendleton, Harrison, Nicholas, Fleming, there is not a Christian, non-Catholic private school as a choice. They would have to go to Lexington for Lex Christian, NKY for Calvary Christian or Ashland for Rose Hill.

 

Your middle point is one of the strongest reasons for not allowing home schoolers to play. No accountablility with them not being in school both academically and behavorial.

 

If there is no school nearby that shares those religious values, they can either move somewhere where there is one, or homeschool. Either the academics is more important, or the opportunity for athletic participation is. It still comes down to choice.

If there is no school nearby that shares those religious values, they can either move somewhere where there is one, or homeschool. Either the academics is more important, or the opportunity for athletic participation is. It still comes down to choice.

 

I think the argument is why should there have to be a choice?