That is some funny stuff. What do you call paying tuition on top of paying taxes?

 

A strictly personal decision and choice.

A lot is made of the supposed academic advantages at private schools, but I wonder what would happen at Trinity, for example, if a fleet of buses dropped off a couple hundred of the worst students from Shawnee, for example.

 

The private schools usually only get the best students with the parents who have the money/interest to send their children there, perhaps to get them away from some of the undesirables at public schools, which don't have the luxury to pick and choose who they take.

 

I don't know much about Louisville, but it seems you a group of haves and a group of have nots with open enrollment. The ones who have the resources escape to the "have" schools and the ones who can't must stay in the "have not" schools.

 

Money is a pretty big advantage and a lot of the private schools seem to have the parents/alumni with the money to support the programs.

 

I think you might be surprised at what would happen. First, NO student at Trinity would ever be labeled an "undesirable". Everyone would be treated as family. Most of these students would choose to work hard and succeed. They would receive a highly individual education based on their specific needs. Are you aware of Trinity's very extensive and successful program for students with learning difficulties? Are you aware of the very small class size and high ratio of councilors for these students at Trinity? Are you aware of the award that Trinity won for making its campus handicap accessible? We see educating as many students as possible, with as diverse backgrounds as possible as part of our mission. There is no rule that says we have to do it, but it is the right thing to do. Can every public school in Jefferson County make the same claims about their programs for students with academic problems? Can many public schools anywhere claim the success with these students that Trinity can?

Yesterday, I had the honor of attending the Shamrock Awards luncheon, and I wish I could remember verbatim the message that was delivered by Dr. Mullen, recounting the vision of Msgr Steinhouser in founding Trinity. But, TrinityAlum hit on the crux of it.

 

Trinity was founded to educate the WIDEST cross-section of students, academically. There are no "undesirables" at Trinity. The committment to this mission is reflected in the expansion of the campus to accommodate more students, and to continued growth in enrollment. This committment to academic excellence for ALL students is reflected in the additional classroom and lab space that was created BEFORE a multi-purpose stadium was begun. It's reflected in the priority Trinity places on academic excellence. It's telling that Trinity is the ONLY school to award letters to students acheiving academic excellence. It's telling that Trinity kicks off their Pride week each year with a luncheon honoring those students. You'd be surprised at some of the names you would have read in the program. How wonderful for all the kids at Trinity that they are a part of a program that places as much, if not more, importance on academics as athletics.

They would politely be asked to return to their buses, because they do not meet the requirement for enrollment. And asked to return to the public school where they belong.

 

Trinity has no "requirement for enrollment". You simply need to take a placement exam so Trinity knows where you need to be placed in the school curriculum, (ie the advanced track, the academic track, the traditional track etc.) Actually Trinity just converted a computer lab to being designed for students with learning differences. The software on those computers are designed specifically for struggling students.

 

If Trinity were to turn away these students as "undesirables", the Archbishop of Louisville would come down on Trinity like no one could ever believe like he should. While Trinity is now technically "independent" of the Archdiocese school system, the fact that he is the Archbishop alone, he wields a great deal of influence on Trinity and he has made it VERY clear he want Catholic education open to ANYONE who wants it regardless of race, creed, or socio-economic status. Also, if Trinity were to turn away these students than I and many other alumni would never donate another penny to Trinity High School.

There are no "undesirables" at Trinity.

To me, this is a huge advantage for private schools. I don't understand why public schools have to spend so much of their resources on kids that don't want to be there. Turn them over to their parents and move on. They're disruptive and expensive to maintain. By catering to these kids, you bring the whole school down.

If Trinity were to turn away these students as "undesirables", the Archbishop of Louisville would come down on Trinity like no one could ever believe; like he should.

 

I missed my semi-colon, sorry about that grammar slip up.

To me, this is a huge advantage for private schools. I don't understand why public schools have to spend so much of their resources on kids that don't want to be there. Turn them over to their parents and move on. They're disruptive and expensive to maintain. By catering to these kids, you bring the whole school down.

You missed the point completely. There are no "undesireables because we would never describe anyone as undesireable. Trinity has programs to bring these kids along and get them ready for more education. It is expensive, but it is part of the schools mission to do it.

To me, this is a huge advantage for private schools. I don't understand why public schools have to spend so much of their resources on kids that don't want to be there. Turn them over to their parents and move on. They're disruptive and expensive to maintain. By catering to these kids, you bring the whole school down.

 

BUT, there is a strong chance you will bring all of society UP! Further, you cannot assume there is a parental factor to turn them back to. Especially with society's wonderful 50% divorce rate and unwed mother numbers. It is not a great situation to be in but there is something exceptional to someone called a teacher, principal and a coach who can make success in these circumstances vs. those who can find a more comfortable environment.

You missed the point completely. There are no "undesireables because we would never describe anyone as undesireable. Trinity has programs to bring these kids along and get them ready for more education. It is expensive, but it is part of the schools mission to do it.

 

What are the parameters for expulsion, with services at Trinity? AND, I do not think you are totally correct in saying never. It was debated on this site of a poor action of Trinity having a Wall of Shame, so that is really not never - maybe, learned from bad mistake.

What are the parameters for expulsion, with services at Trinity? AND, I do not think you are totally correct in saying never. It was debated on this site of a poor action of Trinity having a Wall of Shame, so that is really not never - maybe, learned from bad mistake.

Huh? I'm not sure what you just said, but I'll try to interpret. Students at Trinity can be expelled if they dmonstrate that they are not willing to follow the rules. When did I say never? I'm not sure what your last sentence is trying to say, but if by referring to the wall of shame you are implying something about expulsions you are mistaken. As I recall, the wall of shame was an action by a football coach, more than thirty years ago, that listed people that quit the football team. I'm not sure of the relevance.

 

Let me be clear. All are welcome at Trinity. The school will do more than its part to aid their success. There are some that don't want to be there. They don't have to be.

Huh? I'm not sure what you just said, but I'll try to interpret. Students at Trinity can be expelled if they dmonstrate that they are not willing to follow the rules. When did I say never? I'm not sure what your last sentence is trying to say, but if by referring to the wall of shame you are implying something about expulsions you are mistaken. As I recall, the wall of shame was an action by a football coach, more than thirty years ago, that listed people that quit the football team. I'm not sure of the relevance.

 

So, toe the line or out the door? And the end result is perfect outcome? That is not exceptional perfomance, that is simply exceptional performance perception.

 

As for your "never" comment, I referenced an action by this coach vs. your comment never to label students as undesirable.

 

Your quote:

There are no "undesireables because we would never describe anyone as undesireable

 

However, to list kids who could not cut it in a sports program on a Wall of Shame is not a compliment. It is rather degrading. I am simply pointing out your contention of never as not totally accurate.

So, toe the line or out the door? And the end result is perfect outcome? That is not exceptional perfomance, that is simply exceptional performance perception.

 

As for your "never" comment, I referenced an action by this coach vs. your comment never to label students as undesirable.

 

Your quote:

There are no "undesireables because we would never describe anyone as undesireable

 

However, to list kids who could not cut it in a sports program on a Wall of Shame is not a compliment. It is rather degrading. I am simply pointing out your contention of never as not totally accurate.

 

 

As to your last statement, you're holding as a perception that the actions of a coach 30 years ago are the norm today? I believe if you take the time to search, you'll find that that practice was stopped, and that the very reason you will find, is that it was degrading. YOU are not being totally accurate in trying to define Trinity, as an institution, by the actions of a coach more than 2 decades ago.

So, toe the line or out the door? And the end result is perfect outcome? That is not exceptional perfomance, that is simply exceptional performance perception.

 

As for your "never" comment, I referenced an action by this coach vs. your comment never to label students as undesirable.

 

Your quote:

There are no "undesireables because we would never describe anyone as undesireable

 

However, to list kids who could not cut it in a sports program on a Wall of Shame is not a compliment. It is rather degrading. I am simply pointing out your contention of never as not totally accurate.

 

And that is an unfortunate aspect of that coach's reign that many of us are not at ALL happy about and it was stopped very quickly once it was known.

As to your last statement, you're holding as a perception that the actions of a coach 30 years ago are the norm today? I believe if you take the time to search, you'll find that that practice was stopped, and that the very reason you will find, is that it was degrading. YOU are not being totally accurate in trying to define Trinity, as an institution, by the actions of a coach more than 2 decades ago.

 

Please don't jump off a bridge....read it again, I stated, clearly, to comment and say NEVER is not totally accurate. That is all. I think TrinityAlum means and feels quite strong but to position a point as without fail or error is a major risk in a debate forum. And, did I not comment in a prior post the following:

 

AND, I do not think you are totally correct in saying never. It was debated on this site of a poor action of Trinity having a Wall of Shame, so that is really not never - maybe, learned from bad mistake.

 

So, I do not think I am trying to define Trinity at all.

So, toe the line or out the door? And the end result is perfect outcome? That is not exceptional perfomance, that is simply exceptional performance perception.

 

As for your "never" comment, I referenced an action by this coach vs. your comment never to label students as undesirable.

 

Your quote:

There are no "undesireables because we would never describe anyone as undesireable

 

However, to list kids who could not cut it in a sports program on a Wall of Shame is not a compliment. It is rather degrading. I am simply pointing out your contention of never as not totally accurate.

I don't believe that I have claimed perfect outcome, but I will compare the outcome at Trinity favorably to anyone, anywhere. I think if you went back thirty years ago you would find many actions by football coaches that would not be accepted today, but the point is still irrelevant. We are talking about the school and even thirty years ago kids that quit the football team were still very much valued as students. Keep trying. You will not find a school in this area that does a better job of educating kids from across the academic spectrum. Period.

 

The topic of this thread was unavoidable advantages. Some have tried to make the point that private schools don't have to educate the hard to teach (and expensive) kids. That may be true for some private schools. It is also true of some public schools. It isn't true of Trinity.