Trinity alum

If you read the rules of the KHSAA, you will see what is and is not allowed. You must treat athletes and non athletes the same. And there are no smoking guns or bullets.

The high schools in Jefferson County are large enough to be able to teach all levels. The have not schools of Jefferson County would benefit from the leadership that would be provided by having smart and motivated students that are now concentrated in very few schools. Most high schools in Jefferson County are larger than Trinity, yet Trinity has enough students to be able to teach to all levels. I think that the primary reason behind the magnet programs was to create a couple of schools that JCPS could point to and yell "See, we're just as good as the private schools". For every really good school they made, they also made a really bad one. That is the problem.

If by recruiting you mean all students, I don't have a problem with it. If your school's recruiting efforts target only athletes it is gainst the existing rules for both public and private schools.

The whole tone of the ram95 post was offensive. He is asking the private schools to prove a negative. That is an unreasonable burden. The evidence is out there. It is not necessary to show the distribution of kids that get aid. The smoking gun would be for someone to find a kid that was either given aid in excess of what the independent rating service said they should receive OR to find a nonathlete that applied for aid, was qualified to receive aid and then denied aid. That evidence does not exist. What sickens me is that people like Sexton and the Manual principal KNOW the procedures used by the private schools and they choose to ignore that information. I find them disgusting.

That may be as big a pile of manure as I've ever read. And I had to edit it to make it say manure. First this isn't politics, it is our kids. Second, the education officials of this state have a duty to all children, not just the children of public schools. If athletic scholarships are being given it is against the rules. The burden of proof is on those who would make the charge. Third, there is copious evidence that the financial aid is awarded properly. The private schools have to use a service that is approved by the KHSAA. Sexton knows that. The Manual principal knows that. Every one of the miserable excuses for a human being making these proposals should know it.

I'm not sure that the Manual Administration doesn't share the attitude. Actions speak louder than words. And if you think it's tiresome, every couple of years we have to fight to avoid being thrown out. Now that's tiresome.

I think that the biggest problem for the JCPS, and maybe for most city schools is the lack of support for the schools over the long haul. I worked with a fellow that was very active in his schools booster organisation for several years, until his kids graduated, then he was finished. His work was for his kids and not the school. Compare that to schools like Trinity or x where the alumni are still out in force many long years later. I get the feeling that that loyalty is still there in the more rural counties.

But the Manual crowd refuses to pressure the administration to vote down these discriminatory proposals.

It is no secret that the public schools pick up a lot of kids from the Catholic grade schools. The point is that it seems that no one has a problem when a kid moves from a Catholic school to a public school, but when the reverse happens everyone is ready to cry foul. If any of those kids are making the move to a public school because they can't afford a Catholic school, I'm sorry and we'll try to do a better job of making sure that enough money is available that anyone that wants to attend is able. If the move is for any other reason, it is none of our business. The same is true or kids that choose to move from a public school to a private school.

Boundary rules are self imposed by the school districts and are subject to change at the sole discretion of the school district and thus form no rational basis for separation. In fact, some public schools choose not to impose boundaries. All private schools recruit students and are prohibited from recruiting that is specific to athletics. I would also point out that public schools are not prohibited from recruiting students and in fact, the Jefferson County Public Schools do have an active recruiting effort. Thus recruiting is not a rational basis for separation. By the federal guidelines, I assume you mean Title IX, among other rules. I would point out that most of the private schools are coed and are subject to Title IX. As far as other rules, disiplinary policies, expulsion policies etc. vary from school to school to school within the public systems, so again, Public/Private is not a rational basis for separation. In fact, SOME private schools do a much better job of catering to at risk students than SOME public schools.

Size classifications are reasonable and have logic behind them. I would favor expansion of size classifications into more sprts. Nothing about a size classification tarnishes the championships won by those teams. Prop 20 is an effort to remove certain teams from competition with no rational basis other than that they are good, and what is worse, it doesn't even remove all of the good teams, just the ones that happen to be private schools. It is wrong and it is discriminatory. I have an idea. Maybe we could borrow an idea from horse racing and have a "maiden" classification. It could be modeled after the All A. Only teams that have never won a championship could enter. Since winning the All Maiden would eliminate you from the next years All Maiden, eventually everyone would win a championship.

I think there are two key points about Prop 1. The first is that if it is okay to have a different rule for private schools, then a ten mile limit is also okay, or a five mile limit, or a one mile limit. The problem is that the rules should be the same for all. The second problem is that a 20 mile limit would do very little to change the results on the field. It would single out a very few kids for punishment. In a few years when nothing much had changed, the Prop 1 supporters would be back to say "See we tried to be reasonable, they have to go". I think that the private schools should fight any and every proposal that would treat private schools differently from public schools.

But you are mistaken.

I'm glad you think I'm cute, but Mrs. Alum is the jealous type. The leagues you just mentioned are not affiliated with JCPS or any other school or school system. Are you trying to tell me that the optimists don't allow Catholics? More things I didn't know. Public schools do not own kids and that includes kids that play in optimists leagues.

The Title IX argument is a sham. The argument would only make sense if we failed to support the girls programs. In truth, the girls programs are more dominant than the boys. It doesn't wash, its just more excuses. I've asked you several times to offer suggestions of things that might help to level the playing field that you could support. Still waiting.

I wasn't aware that the public schools had football teams below the high school level. I try to learn something new every day.

Well, not so fast there. Studies of scattered site low income housing have shown two things. First there is no change in the income level of the adults placed in more upscale neighborhoods. Second, the children placed in the more upscale neighborhoods (and in school with more middle class kids) do show a marked increase in performance when compared to the kids that remained in the poorer schools. If the kids are not going to learn at home that hard work in school can lead to a better life, maybe they can learn it from good examples at school.

You got that right.

Male and Manual are private schools run with public money. It is that simple. Any advantage of parent involvement, good students etc that has been claimed for private schools also exists at Male and Manual. They have the added advantage of offering financial aid to every student in the form of the public's tax dollars. The fact that they are supporting these blatantly dicriminatory proposals is disgusting and brings shame on their schools, the administration of the schools, and all who would excuse their behavior.

This gets to the heart of the issue. There are "have" schools and there are "have not" schools. I have no problem saying that the private schools are haves, but they aren't the only ones. If you eliminate them from competition all that will happen is a different set of haves will surface. Most of them are already pretty successful. How about instead, we raise the level of the have not schools. To me the schools with the most at risk students deserve the best facilities and teachers and the smallest class sizes. That takes money and I know that paying for things that the government needs to do is not popular these days, but it needs to be done.

The smart kids weren't picked on because they were the school leaders and to me, that is the point. I think that the selective schools in JCPS are very good schools, but the flip side of it is that for every good school there is also one that is awful. Would those schools be better if they had the leadership of some of the strong students that are concentrated into a few schools? If you have 400 kids per grade, that means you are going to have about 16 freshman, sophmore etc english classes. Four, five or six levels doesn't seem too hard. Out of 400, you should be able to find enough kids for a Calculus A/B section and a Calculus B/C section. Same for a pretty wide selection of AP courses. Finding enough teachers for all of those AP classes might be the bigger problem. As I said in an earlier post. The high schools in Jefferson County are large enough for all levels to be taught at all schools.

I question whether that is true and if there is a rare kid that would fit, there certainly aren't a school full of them. I know that Trinity has made arrangements for kids to take classes at Bellarmine when the need of the kid dictated it. I don't know how it was paid for, I just know that the kid didn't pay any more than the normal Trinity tuition.

I understand a little about how it works, but does it have to work that way? I know we're talking about biting off some trouble, but wouldn't it be worth it? There are some kids that you just can't reach and I don't see why those kids should be allowed to ruin a school.

I see that as something that can be fixed and it starts with the school leadership. A few years ago there was a young man (freshman) at Trinity that had some physical "differences" that would have made him easy prey. Very early in the year one of the coaches picked up that some of the other freshmen were picking on the kid. He asked the seniors on the football team to look out for the kid. When some bad behavior was observed, a couple of the football players explained to the offenders that that was not the way we treated our brothers at Trinity and that the young man in question was a friend of theirs and they would be watching. The problem stopped. In every school you will get the kind of leadership that you value. If a kid becomes a school leader because he or she is an athlete, in spite of the fact that they pick on others and the school tolerates that kind of behavior, that is the kind of leader you will get. If the school insists that everyone be treated with respect and tolerates nothing less, that is the kind of leaders you will get. This does not have to be a public/private difference. Does your school overlook a little hazing on its sports teams in the interest of building team spirit? If it does, what makes you think that that behavior won't carry over into how the athletes treat the students at large. Does your school insist that students treat each other with respect and have a faculty that refuses to ignore bad behavior? Coaches can have a profound impact on these young lives. If a student is passing, but not working up to potential, will the coach assign running or some other kind of punishment? I saw a coach bench a kid once, despite the fact that he was eligible, because the kid wasn't working hard enough in class. You get the kind of school you insist on.

This prompted a question. Don't most of the high schools teach classes that are on widely different levels? If not, why not? It would seem to me that all of the high schools in Jefferson County are large enough to provide a range of levels and to tailor a program that fits the individual (i.e. strong in math and science, weaker in language or the other way around). As far as kids getting picked on because they were smart in high school, that isn't the way I remember it. The smart kids were the leaders and very widely respected.