My one question to all people defending Lex. Cath. is this. If it has nothing to do with kids playing sports then why is the KHSAA putting restrictions on football and baseball next year. Why not put restrictions on the academic team if its not got anything to do with sports. It must be with sports or they would not say football and baseball.

Well, now that all of you have posted your predictable boilerplate defenses of the public school system, how about addressing my proposal which would allow some needy students, some athletes and some not, an opportunity to attend a private school?

 

And again you've decided not to answer my question which directly pertains to your question. When they start accepting students with true needs is when they can receive aid, IMO. Again, a needy child is not one that can't afford an extra $5000 for a high school education.

I agree 100% with Gametime, why punish schools with open enrollments when ALL schools can have open enrollment right now? It's their choice not to do so. It also should be a choice that a parent can send their kids to ANY school they want, and not have the kids extra curricular activities suffer.

 

There is a reason many people cross district boundaries to attend another school, and it's not just about sports either.

How is playing up a class suffering? Would't it be even MORE prestigious to win an open class or 5 or 6A class title?I NEVER said schools shouldn't allow any students to attend their schools! I said those that do should be classed differently than those who don't.The fact is there are enough schools in both catagories to seperate them.Sure there are lots of students that go to a different school for academics, which is great.But if you think that is why most of them do,does OJ Mayo ring a bell?There are lots of kids that go to sports powerhouse schools thinking that's their ticket to college or even the pros!I'm really sure in little tiny schools all over KY.they could compete if they just went to open enrollment!Schools like Bourbon Co. would not have went 0-10 if they had open enrollment!They surely could knock off Lexcath on a year to year basis!And by the way, when was the last time another school from Lexington played Lexcath in football?Why do you think that is?

Stickymitts, just what question of yours do you want answered Is it the accusation that I offended "every public teacher that ever gave an assignment" or is it in regard to all of those students who "battle adversity" just to "get to school each day"? The reason that I answered neither is because I never offended either group. Your emotional, and factless, reply made these erroneous assumptions. But, then, I learned many years ago that if you have no argument you should use emotion. Apparently you learned the same rule.

I am still waiting for an answer to my proposal that private school supporters be allowed to financially assist needy students as do the public schools. I feel sure that you public schoolers will assert that we will only help athletes. That is a rather self-serving reply. First, we would spread our aid at least as well as the public schools do. We would certainly be no more guilty of bringing in athletes than are you people. After all, as I have stated, our schools have helping the needy as a major part of our overall mission. Unfortunately, we are handcuffed in this effort partially because, heaven forbid, we may assist a needy student who is also an athlete. Obviously, the "concern" of the public people has nothing to do with helping the needy. It is merely an effort to keep the private schools out of this "jackpot" that the public schools have enjoyed for many years. Of course, that is probably part of that effort for that "level playing field".

Stickymitts, just what question of yours do you want answered Is it the accusation that I offended "every public teacher that ever gave an assignment" or is it in regard to all of those students who "battle adversity" just to "get to school each day"? The reason that I answered neither is because I never offended either group. Your emotional, and factless, reply made these erroneous assumptions. But, then, I learned many years ago that if you have no argument you should use emotion. Apparently you learned the same rule.

 

 

First of all, I never asked either of those questions. My question was, "Shouldn't the kids that aren't worthy of your higher education be able to receive this aid that you're giving kids who's overall situation isn't even in the same ballpark?"

 

Not sure where you read the "questions" you posted. They are statements which you ignored until now.

 

Excuse me if I find it funny that you don't think you've offended either group. Your preaching that I'm giving "emotional and factless replies" is nothing more than what you gave. Complaining that you have the money to spend on private education and still having to pay taxes towards a public education in which you, "get absolutely nothing from" is in fact a slap in the face. I find it even more hysterical that you are saying you didn't offend anyone in those categories when in fact you offended me and I'm in that category.

 

I also see your using your "rule" for this argument. I sure do hope not all private school advocates think this way. That you're so high and mighty that a "needy" kid is one that needs $5000 for a high school education.

 

BTW, if you would've actually taken the time to read my initial post I stated that not all schools, public or private are squeaky clean. How could I expect you to acknowledge that, though.

Stickymitts, just what question of yours do you want answered Is it the accusation that I offended "every public teacher that ever gave an assignment" or is it in regard to all of those students who "battle adversity" just to "get to school each day"? The reason that I answered neither is because I never offended either group. Your emotional, and factless, reply made these erroneous assumptions. But, then, I learned many years ago that if you have no argument you should use emotion. Apparently you learned the same rule.

I am still waiting for an answer to my proposal that private school supporters be allowed to financially assist needy students as do the public schools. I feel sure that you public schoolers will assert that we will only help athletes. That is a rather self-serving reply. First, we would spread our aid at least as well as the public schools do. We would certainly be no more guilty of bringing in athletes than are you people. After all, as I have stated, our schools have helping the needy as a major part of our overall mission. Unfortunately, we are handcuffed in this effort partially because, heaven forbid, we may assist a needy student who is also an athlete. Obviously, the "concern" of the public people has nothing to do with helping the needy. It is merely an effort to keep the private schools out of this "jackpot" that the public schools have enjoyed for many years. Of course, that is probably part of that effort for that "level playing field".

 

You make a silly presumption a student would be better off at a private school. So I will ask you a fairly simple question. What schools would do a better job than say: Highlands, Beechwood, Holmes IB Program, Louisville Male to name just a few. Oh wait, I have already asked just like so many other questions.

 

Your presumption is based on a basis as if the private school would be qualified to accept any and all students who apply. That is just not true or is the case. You are making great leaps of assumptions the private schools actually educate better. That is simply not true.

Ah, Stickymitts, I should have surmised from your overly reactionary posts that you are "in that category". I commend you. However, if you interpret my statement that I receive nothing of value from all the greenbacks I contribute to public education as derrogatory toward those associated with public schools, so be it.

However, I must remind you that, in post number 30 (well before you became so involved in the fray), I stated that private schools are not "without sin" in these matters. Thus, possibly you should do a little review of your own. I can't reply to much of your posting because, to be honest, it lacks organization and substance. What in the world do you mean in your fourth paragraph above? What has "5,000 for a high school education" got to do with anything? Are you saying that we spend $5,000 on each student in the public schools? If so, I would submit that the rate of return on our investment may be suspect. And you still have not addressed my proposal to help the needy attend private schools, have you?

Ah, Stickymitts, I should have surmised from your overly reactionary posts that you are "in that category". I commend you. However, if you interpret my statement that I receive nothing of value from all the greenbacks I contribute to public education as derrogatory toward those associated with public schools, so be it.

However, I must remind you that, in post number 30 (well before you became so involved in the fray), I stated that private schools are not "without sin" in these matters. Thus, possibly you should do a little review of your own. I can't reply to much of your posting because, to be honest, it lacks organization and substance. What in the world do you mean in your fourth paragraph above? What has "5,000 for a high school education" got to do with anything? Are you saying that we spend $5,000 on each student in the public schools? If so, I would submit that the rate of return on our investment may be suspect. And you still have not addressed my proposal to help the needy attend private schools, have you?

 

I will address your proposal. You have completely failed to address the way in how it would be funded and be held accountable. Now, how about answering the questions being asked of you.

SilverShadow, I am an advocate for the private schools just as you are for the public schools. I am biased. You are biased. I have a private school background. You have a public school background. Both of us seem to be rather well educated. Naturally we each feel that the route we travelled is the better path to success. Now does that really make my assumption "silly" than it does your opposite assumption? I would expect a less defensive approach from you.

For the fifth time, I believe, let me again state that all I am asking is that we who financially support private schools be allowed to do so without constant accusations from the public people. I have also mentioned that I am, by law, forced to contribute to the public school coffers with absolutely no "rate of return". I am merely suggesting that I should be able to assist my constituency without being handcuffed

by the fear that I just may assist a student athlete in the process. Now, isn't that a rather reasonable request?

StThomasMore - Some students thrive with a private school education, while others thrive with a public school education. It is the unfortunate truth that some students are only able to pursue one option. Before you claim the "predictable" "emotional response" let it be known that I am an advocate of private schools, however I agree 100% with SilverShadow and SM. Using your logic, what do you propose would happen without these tax dollars? Is it that difficult to fathom the fact that public schools have done way more good to the world that you live in than privates could think about accomplishing rather than you gaining "absolutely nothing?"

 

99.999% of students regardless of scholl affiliation will affect our lives based on academic pursuit rather than athletic talents. Although they are something I am passionate about, aren't sports supposed to be extracurriculer activities?

SilverShadow, I am an advocate for the private schools just as you are for the public schools. I am biased. You are biased. I have a private school background. You have a public school background. Both of us seem to be rather well educated. Naturally we each feel that the route we travelled is the better path to success. Now does that really make my assumption "silly" than it does your opposite assumption? I would expect a less defensive approach from you.

For the fifth time, I believe, let me again state that all I am asking is that we who financially support private schools be allowed to do so without constant accusations from the public people. I have also mentioned that I am, by law, forced to contribute to the public school coffers with absolutely no "rate of return". I am merely suggesting that I should be able to assist my constituency without being handcuffed

by the fear that I just may assist a student athlete in the process. Now, isn't that a rather reasonable request?

 

 

What? Go out and buy whatever you desire without accountability? Sure, go right ahead. Bet you cannot find one organization that would find such independence without accountability in anything.

 

As for no rate of return to public education, the tables can absolutely be turned to the private schools - how much have private schools pay society for all its goods and services from government agencies? Given the fact that all of it is tax exempt means the rest of the for profit world carries the free ride the private schools get. It works both ways.

 

As for approach, you have YET to answer any of the proposed questions of you. Why is that?

Now, isn't that a rather reasonable request?

 

 

I think so.

SilverShadow, I would assume that we would be "held accountable" in the same manner as are the public schools- no less but no more. Indeed, that would be progress. At the risk of shocking the public school people, let me say that I feel sure that we are at least as honorable as are they.

As for answering your query about the northern Kentucky public schools, let me say that they, as well as many of those in Lexington and Louisville are fine schools. Of course, the private schools in those areas are equally as fine. However, my elementary and secondary years were not spent in those urban areas and, thus, my situation was somewhat different. Private schools were and, from what I hear from that area, remain better.

SilverShadow, I would assume that we would be "held accountable" in the same manner as are the public schools- no less but no more. Indeed, that would be progress. At the risk of shocking the public school people, let me say that I feel sure that we are at least as honorable as are they.

As for answering your query about the northern Kentucky public schools, let me say that they, as well as many of those in Lexington and Louisville are fine schools. Of course, the private schools in those areas are equally as fine. However, my elementary and secondary years were not spent in those urban areas and, thus, my situation was somewhat different. Private schools were and, from what I hear from that area, remain better.

 

 

You have no facts to base that on. You are simply operating on hearsay. Thanks for making it easy.

Good grief, SilverShadow, we don't get anything for free. We pay the same taxes as do you public people and, since you all seem to believe that we are all well to do, it would seem that we must pay a goodly amount more than the average public family.

Possible my mistake was in mentioning taxes at all. However, the truth is the truth. All I seek is the right to help students to go to private schools without the typical distrust and accusations from the public people if some of the assistance goes to athletes. By the way, do you really find the public schools accountable? If so, fine. As I said, the privates would be held to the same standards of accountability. Now, isn't that fair?

Heresay? Hardly. Actually, it is from some rather, shall we say, eye witness testimony.