Enforce The Laws In Place????

[leatherneck]

Open enrollment should be for improving the education of a child, not to field strong athletic teams. If there is a good educationally reason for open enrollment, enlighten me please because I cannot see one. I see an athletic advantage and do not think that should be the business of school systems.

 

And that is a major difference in how we think. I personally believe that athletics is a very important part of school systems and that administrations that do not place a very high committment on athletics are failing their students. Administrators who have a ho-hum approach to athletics probably have a ho-hum approach to other aspects of the school system also. I personally believe, having been affiliated with Highlands for a long time and married into a family that has been affiliated and rather actively involved with the school on many levels for an even longer time, that the success we have experienced in athletics plays a direct role in the success we have academically. The pride we have in our athletic success transcends into the classroom and causes the students to want to be a success there also. Nothing is more true than the cliche that success breeds success. Nothing is more addicting than winning. When you win on the field, you want to win in the classroom. I've seen it, experienced it, felt it. If I can improve my athletics by having open enrollment, I know the result will be improved academics, because good athletes generally result in good students. Winners want to be winners everywhere. I acknowledge that there are a lot of generalities in my post above and I am sure you can point out super athletes that didn't do well academically, as well as administrators that didn't give beans about athletics but were super committed to academics. But I still stand by my believe that generally winners want to be winners in everything they do. And its easier to establish a winning tradition in athletics, than academics, in a school system because of the constant and very tangible way of measuring success. You may be right in the way you think. I just don't think that way and based on my experiences, I see no problem at all with open enrollment or school's making decisions with athletics in mind. And finally on a altruistic level, why would anyone want to force a parent to be forced to send a kid only to the school district in which they reside? To me freedom of choice (particularly when we are talking about educating your children) is kind of important in this country.

[ladiesbballcoach]

I assumed nothing, you were the one that started talking about the disadvantages of small rural schools. I simply stated that IF the rural schools are not capable of providing an good education then the parents should move, after all the education is the most important thing isn't it? If the schools are that good then why is athletics such an issue? After all didn't you say "I see an athletic advantage and do not think that should be the business of school systems". If that is your stance then why do you support the administrators that are pushing Prop 20, because as you say seeking an athletic advantage should not be the business of a school system.

My question on open enrollment is that if the ONLY reason is to have an athletic advantage, I don't think it is something that should be pursued. Prop 20 is about, and you won't like this, leveling what is a perceived unbalanced playing field. I see open enrollment as "recruiting" athletes for the expressed purpose of winning championships, not for an educational reason.

 

Prop 20 is about putting everyone on an even level. It is not asking anyone to change their "educational focus" to bring athletic competition in line. Open enrollment is doing that.

[ladiesbballcoach]

And that is a major difference in how we think. I personally believe that athletics is a very important part of school systems and that administrations that do not place a very high committment on athletics are failing their students. Administrators who have a ho-hum approach to athletics probably have a ho-hum approach to other aspects of the school system also. I personally believe, having been affiliated with Highlands for a long time and married into a family that has been affiliated and rather actively involved with the school on many levels for an even longer time, that the success we have experienced in athletics plays a direct role in the success we have academically. The pride we have in our athletic success transcends into the classroom and causes the students to want to be a success there also. Nothing is more true than the cliche that success breeds success. Nothing is more addicting than winning. When you win on the field, you want to win in the classroom. I've seen it, experienced it, felt it. If I can improve my athletics by having open enrollment, I know the result will be improved academics, because good athletes generally result in good students. Winners want to be winners everywhere. I acknowledge that there are a lot of generalities in my post above and I am sure you can point out super athletes that didn't do well academically, as well as administrators that didn't give beans about athletics but were super committed to academics. But I still stand by my believe that generally winners want to be winners in everything they do. And its easier to establish a winning tradition in athletics, than academics, in a school system because of the constant and very tangible way of measuring success. You may be right in the way you think. I just don't think that way and based on my experiences, I see no problem at all with open enrollment or school's making decisions with athletics in mind. And finally on a altruistic level, why would anyone want to force a parent to be forced to send a kid only to the school district in which they reside? To me freedom of choice (particularly when we are talking about educating your children) is kind of important in this country.

I agree with your post in regards to the success breeds success and a successful athletic team will breed success to 99% of the school. No doubt. But I do think there should be limits to what you do to create that success. Schools who have a school period 100% designed for athletic teams to lift weights, I don't think that is what a school period is for. There are other examples of situations that would be similar that you would want to put limits on creating the success. I don't believe you would encourage cheating or recruiting to breed your success would you?

[TigerKat]

Great proposal in theory. Won't work in reality. Reason sometimes in situations there is not proving who is doing what and what needs to be enforced. The example that I posted several weeks back is an example of what I mean. An MSer from Meade County receives a unsolicited package promoting the Jefferson County private schools. She is not Catholic and just happens to be the best female basketball player in the county. NO OTHER MS player in Meade County received this information.

 

From my understanding the KHSAA investigated and felt it was recruiting but WHO sent it? No way to find out. No one to punish in enforcing the rules.

 

Let's say my child attends a private Christian school and plays on an AAU team with a child that attends a public school AND ALSO do not attend church anywhere. The children become friends and I talk to the parents about the love of Jesus Christ and they begin to attend my church and we discuss their child attending the private school with my child even though they live in another county. Is this legal? I would say I am recruiting. Is KHSAA to get into conversations among parents?

 

You are just Evangelizing like the good Christian you are.

[4chs]

Why are you assuming the schools are poor? As I have stated in the past, Pendleton County has a Nobel Prize winner in Science for his work in DNA. Any other school, private or public have a Nobel Prize winner?

 

Robert Grubbs, who graduated from Paducah Tilghman in 1960, won the 2005 Nobel Prize for his work in organic chemistry.

[leatherneck]

I agree with your post in regards to the success breeds success and a successful athletic team will breed success to 99% of the school. No doubt. But I do think there should be limits to what you do to create that success. Schools who have a school period 100% designed for athletic teams to lift weights, I don't think that is what a school period is for. There are other examples of situations that would be similar that you would want to put limits on creating the success. I don't believe you would encourage cheating or recruiting to breed your success would you?

 

I assume that is a rhetorical question and don't need to answer it. And I am not a fan of weight lifting classes either but that is a local school board decision. If they feel they can provide the quality of education needed and allow for the weight lifting class, I trust them to make the right call for their school. If they screw it up, its up to the local voters to throw them out. Not me sitting up here in N.Ky to second guess them.

 

But allowing for open enrollment isn't cheating and I would think you would have to agree with that conclusion; and it isn't hurting the academic process either in my opinion. Actually, I think a very strong case can be made that open enrollment is helping the academic process and the athletic process at Highlands. When you allow talented children, be they athletes or academicians or hopefully both, from outside the school district to attend your district, you raise the bar for the in district students. Competitive kids and their parents welcome the increased challenge and competition. Sure, there will be situations where the in district student is upset because she or he is not be the valedictorian that year (losing out to the out of district student), but he or she will have still most likely gotten more out of the educational process when there was tough competition than the situation where the in district student was the valedictorian, but there was no real competition. I tell the parents in Ft. Thomas who like to grumble from time to time about the out of district players (was a lot more of that last year; not much of it this year since there are few out of district players on the team) that its just competition and if their kids respond positively, the competition will make their kids much better football players. The same holds true in the academic arena also. And it also sends a very positive message (or at least should) to all schools out there: rest on your rear and not provide a quality education option to the students in your district at your peril.

[All Tell]

My question on open enrollment is that if the ONLY reason is to have an athletic advantage, I don't think it is something that should be pursued. Prop 20 is about, and you won't like this, leveling what is a perceived unbalanced playing field. I see open enrollment as "recruiting" athletes for the expressed purpose of winning championships, not for an educational reason.

 

Prop 20 is about putting everyone on an even level. It is not asking anyone to change their "educational focus" to bring athletic competition in line. Open enrollment is doing that.

 

So can I assume that in the LBBC world open enrollment schools would also be booted as part of prop 20?

[BGGreen]

So can I assume that in the LBBC world open enrollment schools would also be booted as part of prop 20?

 

Let's ban all schools founded on days that end in "Y"!!