Home Schoolers Push the Tim Tebow Bill

Sad to say but I feel if it comes down to allowing a future 5 star athlete and a student wanting to take physics, the athlete will more than likely get a loophole in the state of Alabama. I know they said they don't want it but I have seen some high schools in the state do anything to win. (football)

I agree 100%. If public schools are so bad that they do not want their children attending and learning from the teachers who do not have the same moral values as their family (I believe that was how the article stated it.) then why do they believe the coach will be any different? If they do not want their children going to public schools because they do not want their children interacting with the other children there socially then how are they going to get around that on the baseball field, football field, in the bandroom etc. Put a blindfold on them and earplugs in their ears???? This just doesn't make sense to me as a teacher...they want it all! They want to keep them at home and pick and choose what parts of school they participate in..there are places that home-schooled children can participate in sports. We see it everyday in this very paper where teams at Veteran's Park have won awards. There are all kinds of teams out there they just have to go out and find them. The only exception might be football but I know there are teams in the other sports out there that are not connected to a team.

I totally agree. Sports and extra-curriculars are things that you give up when you choose to homeschool.

I went to a school that didn't have football at all; but did that give any of the students a right to go play on teams at other schools? Not unless they wanted to actually attend another school.

I just think homeschooling is a choice; much like it was a choice to go to my high school.

I am sure there are some homeschool parents on here that can give a much better insight; and I'd love to hear it.

yes, paying my taxes does cut it! my taxes pay for the school but in order to participate in school activities that i pay for you want to tell me i have to give my son a bad education! thats some kinda bs there, the principles and school boards are against it because they know they are sub-standard and it would make homeschooling more attractive. mostly its not the teachers fault or the principle. it is standardized testing requirements that tie educators hands. if you think public schools around here are top notch then ask a high schooler to balance a checkbook without a calculator.public schools are just another way for big brother to brainwash the next generation. and many teachers dont know better. my homeschooler can think for himself, read on the college level, knows north carolina is not the location of first flight, and is fully aware of the fact that columbus had nothing to do with discovering america, oh and by the way george washington was not our first leader, we had a whole system of government before that
john hanson

quote:

Originally posted by big red afro:
yes, paying my taxes does cut it! my taxes pay for the school but in order to participate in school activities that i pay for you want to tell me i have to give my son a bad education! thats some kinda bs there, the principles and school boards are against it because they know they are sub-standard and it would make homeschooling more attractive. mostly its not the teachers fault or the principle. it is standardized testing requirements that tie educators hands. if you think public schools around here are top notch then ask a high schooler to balance a checkbook without a calculator.public schools are just another way for big brother to brainwash the next generation. and many teachers dont know better. my homeschooler can think for himself, read on the college level, knows north carolina is not the location of first flight, and is fully aware of the fact that columbus had nothing to do with discovering america, oh and by the way george washington was not our first leader, we had a whole system of government before that
john hanson

im not down on teachers, my sister is one, my mother was one, now in a way i am one as well, nope i didnt finish my education major, but one of my sons skipped 2 grades when he decided to go back to school

quote:

Originally posted by T S C:
Link

I can see both sides on this one. On the one hand, I think that homeschooled kids should have the opportunity to participate in all the things like football, cheerleading, and band, etc. On the other hand, I think that if you take your kids out of public school, then you take your kids out of public school.

The whole 'we pay taxes' thing doesn't cut it. My parents paid taxes and I went to Rogers. We didn't have the same offerings as Brooks, but that didn't mean that I was entitled to go to Brooks and take physics even though it was a Lauderdale County School and that is where my parent's tax money was going. Way back when I was in school they had tennis at Brooks, but not at Rogers. I couldn't go over to Brooks and go out for varsity tennis. Why? Because I didn't attend school at Brooks. I think that should be the same for kids who are homeschooled.

As far as participating in extra-curriculars such as band, athletics, and theatre... if the parents want to home school then they should have to look to community or private sources for these activities. Kids can play ball in city leagues or through the YMCA or play travel league. They can take private music lessons and they can join a community theatre.

I see this bill as parents who want to have their cake and eat it, too. If the schools are so bad that the kids cannot be educated there, then by all means these parents should be getting involved and making the schools a place where they want to send their kids. It is not fair to the kids who attend those schools for the parents to be cherry picking the services that they want to enjoy.

in TENN. they allow a kid to play a sport at the school nearest them that offers that sport. in other words, a kid that goes to mars hill (but actually lives in the rogers district) would be allowed to play football for rogers as long as they meet all the requirements. if it can be done in fla. and tenn. i don't see why it wont work in alabama.

quote:

Originally posted by big red afro:....oh and by the way george washington was not our first leader, we had a whole system of government before that
john hanson

One can't forget Peyton Randolph.

It will boil down to how good the athlete is. I promise you if he/she is good they will find an exception to the rules.

Big Red Afro - what specific things about the school that your child attended did you have think were bad? What specific things did you do to try and remedy it?

Also, the "I pay my taxes" does NOT cut it. Many people with no children at all pay taxes. Can they go play ball at a school in their district, too?

As to the FL and TN laws allowing kids who attend private schools or are homeschooled to play for the school district where they live, YES that is unfair to the kids that attend the local schools. The curriculum is different - as Big Red Afro pointed out, he's teaching his kids a vastly different material set then the public school children are learning. If the children at the public school must maintain a "C" average in their studies and meet certain attendance requirements, it is comparing apples to oranges to allow a homeschooled child to participate on the same team.

As to allowing a child who attends Mars Hill to play football at Rogers - because Mars Hill does not have football and Rogers does - shouldn't we allow the Waterloo High School kids to play football first?

The schools should not have to bend over backwards for people who have chosen to exclude themsevles.

quote:

Originally posted by big red afro:
yes, paying my taxes does cut it! my taxes pay for the school but in order to participate in school activities that i pay for you want to tell me i have to give my son a bad education! thats some kinda bs there, the principles and school boards are against it because they know they are sub-standard and it would make homeschooling more attractive. mostly its not the teachers fault or the principle. it is standardized testing requirements that tie educators hands. if you think public schools around here are top notch then ask a high schooler to balance a checkbook without a calculator.public schools are just another way for big brother to brainwash the next generation. and many teachers dont know better. my homeschooler can think for himself, read on the college level, knows north carolina is not the location of first flight, and is fully aware of the fact that columbus had nothing to do with discovering america, oh and by the way george washington was not our first leader, we had a whole system of government before that
john hanson

After looking at your post, I seriously hope that your are not attempting to teach your son English; if so, you are doing him a serious injustice.

The bottom line of this topic is funding. These students are already costing public schools because state funding is based on average daily attendance. To let them or their parents pick and choose programs in which to participate at will is incredibly unfair.

If this moronic bill is allowed to pass, these student athletes should be REQUIRED to purchase their own uniforms, band instruments, equipment, etc. If a parent is unhappy with the status quo, I would suggest that he or she move to Florida or Tennessee.

This moronic bill will not pass and hopefully it will send a message to parents who think they can cherry pick

Just a simple question here: Is the football (or other athletic program, for that matter) supported by tax money? Out here, for your kid to play football, you have to pony up a few thousand. Ditto cheerleading, baseball, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by zippadeedoodah:
Just a simple question here: Is the football (or other athletic program, for that matter) supported by tax money? Out here, for your kid to play football, you have to pony up a few thousand. Ditto cheerleading, baseball, etc.

In my school, a parent (believe me, I've been there) always winds up spending money on extracurricular things. However, Uniforms are provided but must be returned after the applicable season. Also, the coaches, band directors, etc. are being paid just the same (actually, more) than classroom teachers. Band students, for the most part, supply their own instruments. That factor depends upon the instrument that the student chooses. Band booster funds or donors supply the rest. How is it fair to let someone take advantage of a program to which he or she has contributed neither money nor sweat equity?

My daughter is in the marching band and concert band and we pay out the nose for both. She is a majorette in the marching band and so far (for next year) we've already paid for a $500 uniform - and she'll need another $500 uniform next year, $50 shoes, $40 tights, $60 for earrings and arm spangles, $150 for windsuit, $50 for a spirit jersey... and we haven't even bought her batons! For concert band she'll need sticks and mallets and black pants, white shirt, and black shoes, a practice pad (she's a drummer), and on and on - it does not end. Oh, and $2500 to go to the Sugar Bowl.

My problem with having homeschooled kids or kids that attend private school being on the majorette line is that they are not a part of the school. Band is not just something they do from 4pm - 6pm. It is a class and they get credit for it. Just as much as typing, biology, and English are classes - athletics, fine arts, and other extra curricular activities are, too.

If my kid's school isn't good enough to teach your child academics, then the athletic, fine arts, and other extra curriculars are too good to teach them social skills.

Since many kids that are homeschooled are affiliated with a church (i.e. Highland Baptist etc.) that offer sports through UpWard Sports -- they have opportunities. Not to mention, summer ball and youth football league and travel basketball -- some of those are affiliated with a school, but do not have the requirement that you attend the school...it's not like they don't have options, it just may not be the "star of the school" options...

However, I do think that as more and more families opt to home-school, I'm sure they will lobby and find a way to get the opportunities one way or another. I am neither for nor against this -- like TSC -- I see both sides...

quote:

Originally posted by T S C:
Big Red Afro - what specific things about the school that your child attended did you have think were bad? What specific things did you do to try and remedy it?

Also, the "I pay my taxes" does NOT cut it. Many people with no children at all pay taxes. Can they go play ball at a school in their district, too?

the problem with our tax code is that at some point someone will pay for something they dont get thats why i support the fair tax {see post about it today} but i do pay taxes and i should be able to reap the benifits from them. it is the very idea that cause us to leave the protection of the crown, surely with all the tea parties being organised right now this should sound familiar.
as to specific problems i have had with the various public school systems i have named some already.however here are a few more. in this school system my children have been taught and required to recite christian prayers, this only started after it was found out that we are not a christian family. most recently i had a problem with a punishment that was handed down and the superintendant had her secretary turn me away even though i had an appointment to discuss the problem, never even spoke to me. also at the freshmant center the gangs are out of control there 3 times ugm or gd jumped my son on school property and nothing was done about it. leaving me with saftey concerns as well

to the other person who insulted my english you are not going to draw me into an argument.
if you fear i am not intelligent enough to educate my son in any subject, tough. i dont wanna fight with someone who is worried about proper english on the forum. waste of my time and yours...

I homeschooled Sophmore year- Senior year. I chose do to so, because of an incident that happened at the school that I attended; where they didn't do anything to remedy it. Last time I went into detail about that, my reply was deleted, so that is all I'll say about the reason.

I can definitely see both sides of this. I had to learn art and music through private lesson instructors, instead of going through a school. I would have definitely enjoyed going through a school more. I would have liked it for the social interaction more-so than the "quality", at least that's how I think I would have liked it. xD

However, the program that I attended, still had dances and proms. I wasn't the athletic type, so I don't remember if they had sports affiliation or not; but I /think/ they did have some sort of sports.

I'm not sure if it is still around, but I would suggest that these parents try to find a program like the one I attended; that already gives a child options.

I guess, my opinion boils down to- what is most important for the kids that are homeschooled? I would think that it would be a positive, instead of a negative, at least for the kids. Especially the ones that didn't choose to be homeschooled but were forced into it, by parents or situations.


I'm sure it would take a restructuring of the education athletic system- which yes, would be a lot of work. So I understand why they aren't jumping to change all this for homeschooled children.

Personally, I excelled at homeschooling. It worked for me. Almost every kid I remember meeting at the main building, were very intelligent kids. One of which went to college at 16, and excelled there. Would he have done the same if he attended public school? Possibly- but no one can argue that some kids just don't have the time to absorb all the information thrown at them in a days or weeks time. Sometimes the learning at your own pace, helps tremendously, and homeschooling gives that option, as long as you stay within your coarse-load.

I see the positives and negatives. I've been through public school and ended out in homeschooling and can tell you the positives and negatives through both of those as well. I think that this would maybe be a good thing for the kids, if it's doable or not, depending on funding and expenses is where it really should be debated.

That's my two cents. hehe

~Amanda

quote:

Originally posted by big red afro:
the problem with our tax code is that at some point someone will pay for something they dont get thats why i support the fair tax {see post about it today} but i do pay taxes and i should be able to reap the benifits from them.

Which way is it? You say first that people pay for something they don't get, then that you pay and should be able to reap the benefits. Sometimes, Big Red Afro, due to our tax code and the fact that society as a whole benefits from public education, some people will have to pay the tax and not reap the benefit.

If I felt that my daughter's school was dangerous, then I would remove her. No questions asked. If it were the case that the school were too dangerous of a place for her to learn English and algebra, then why would it be a safe enough place for her to learn to play the flute or run track? That is hypocrisy at it's finest. I like this part, so I'll take it, but I don't like this part, so you can have it.

People make sacrifices every day. The child who homeschools so that they can attend college at 16 sacrifices a lot of their childhood, the chance to play varsity sports, and the time wasted at the mall with friends hanging out. They are rewarded with an excellent career. They student who homeschools to avoid bullies and a dangerous environment sacrifices the social aspects of going to school with their friends so that they can learn in a safe environment.

By allowing homeschooled and private school educated children to participate in public school activities, you are sending the message to the kids that attend those schools that the school isn't good enough, safe enough, tolerant enough, whatever enough and that is not fair to the students who attend those schools.

quote:

Originally posted by T S C:

quote:

Originally posted by big red afro:
the problem with our tax code is that at some point someone will pay for something they dont get thats why i support the fair tax {see post about it today} but i do pay taxes and i should be able to reap the benifits from them.

Which way is it? You say first that people pay for something they don't get, then that you pay and should be able to reap the benefits. Sometimes, Big Red Afro, due to our tax code and the fact that society as a whole benefits from public education, some people will have to pay the tax and not reap the benefit.

If I felt that my daughter's school was dangerous, then I would remove her. No questions asked. If it were the case that the school were too dangerous of a place for her to learn English and algebra, then why would it be a safe enough place for her to learn to play the flute or run track? That is hypocrisy at it's finest. I like this part, so I'll take it, but I don't like this part, so you can have it.

People make sacrifices every day. The child who homeschools so that they can attend college at 16 sacrifices a lot of their childhood, the chance to play varsity sports, and the time wasted at the mall with friends hanging out. They are rewarded with an excellent career. They student who homeschools to avoid bullies and a dangerous environment sacrifices the social aspects of going to school with their friends so that they can learn in a safe environment.

By allowing homeschooled and private school educated children to participate in public school activities, you are sending the message to the kids that attend those schools that the school isn't good enough, safe enough, tolerant enough, whatever enough and that is not fair to the students who attend those schools.

You say you would remove your kid if you felt their school was dangerous. Then imply that homeschooling your child to avoid bullies or a dangerous situation somehow denies the child a worthwhile experience. So which is it?

I said that people make sacrifices.

If I felt that my child's school was dangerous, I would remove her immediately. I would force her to sacrifice the worthwhile experiences of being a majorette, playing soccer, and being on the scholar bowl team to make sure that she was safe.

If I choose to take my kid out of public school, then I choose to forfeit the opportunities that go along with it. It is contradictory to say "my child can march in your band, play soccer with your students, and take this class and that class - but your school is not adequate / safe for my child to attend".

What if you had a very high achieving child and you/they need services the school system could not afford or did not want to provide? Sometimes you have to do what is best for your child. Believe it or not it is not always about "your school" not being good enough for my child in a snobbish way.

Hiflyer, I don't get the point you are trying to make.

I have a high achieving kid. She has been in some of the worst schools in the ghettos of Atlanta and excelled. She has gone to one of the best charter schools in Georgia and excelled. She attended a backwoods, backwards, small 1A school here in Alabama and excelled. She is now at a large, diverse, and yet academically mediocre school near our current home and guess what? She is excelling. What can the school offer my kid that I cannot provide in this day and age? She wants to take Italian. They don't offer it at her school. So she can take it online (for free) this summer. If she wanted to study robotics or engineering, she could do that at a summer camp, online, or as and independent study assignment. Schools do not weight a child down and prevent them from learning.

Believe it or not, I never said anything about being snobbish. I said that if the school is not adequate enough or safe enough or whatever enough for your child to attend academically, then it is not adequate enough or safe enough or whatever enough for your child to attend socially and take part in extracurricular activities.

I doubt if it will pass. I home schooled my two from 7th grade on but not for any of the reasons mentioned here. I am not getting into a bashing of public schools but I can tell you they are fighting this strictly over money. Its not just taxes, they get paid for every day a kid attends and if you happen to have a parent that works for the government, they get double.
They are using sports and the extra activities to lure kids back into the system. Its one of the carrots they have.

What I am saying is that if a child is home schooled, I see not reason they should not be able to play sports for a public school. If they go to a private school then I agree with you.

Why would you allow your children to play sports with children that you didn't want them to learn alongside?

quote:

Originally posted by T S C:
Why would you allow your children to play sports with children that you didn't want them to learn alongside?

Because I'd like the state to offer me that choice?

Is that too simple?

I have no choice to effect which public school programs my tax dollars go to fund, whether I avail myself of those services or not.

I chose to opt back in to one of those services and that's hypocritical?

I'm paying the full share of my tax either way.

If I only benefit from part of what they fund, those who avail themselves of the entire system still come out ahead if you're speakly strictly from a financial point of view.



Submitted for your approval:

Computer Literacy (A Satire)
by SardonicPoet

Joe shivered as he felt the residual gust of air from outside rush past him as the automatic door swung back into the closed position behind him. His breath still frosted in front of him for a few more seconds before he drew in the warm, moist air that filled the cozy walls of the Littletown Public Library. Record lows for the past three days had kept him and his family voluntarily imprisoned within the confines of their central heating system, but the emotional chill resulting from that much time spent in close quarters with those he loved had driven him into the relatively welcoming arms of the driving wind outside; braving the elements for the short trek to this humble bastion of civilization and literacy.

He walked past the smiling desk clerk as he slid his returns absent-mindedly into the small chute in front of her; her cheer eliciting nothing more from his frost-locked facial muscles than a small grin and a nod of acknowledgement.

He perused the annals of the fictinoal and their often-less-factual counterparts of non-fiction more to kill time than anything else. As he'd expected, he found nothing more than the usual dated selection of celophane-entombed literature. Even the shelves marked New Arrivals groaned under the weight of a horde of tomes that could best be described as middle-aged rather than infants.

But his steady feet carried him eventually to what he knew was his inevitable destination.

It had only been a scant few months since the small library had installed the bank of desktop computers on a far wall; whimsically decorating the walls behind each machine with various paintings of valances and curtains. The artistic flourish had been lost on Joe at first, but as he began to experiment with the machines his children looked at with no more wonder than he and his brothers had looked at a Lego set, he realized that the metaphor of a window to the outside world was apt and powerful.

He sat down (more slowly than he used to), he reached to pull his worn wallet from his pocket and retrieve the plastic card with the small numbers that were used to sign into the computers. He labored to punch the correct sequence on the keyboard and pressed the return (for some reason it was labeled "Enter"). A few heartbeats later, the machine noiselessly produced a portrait of a frowning child and the words "Your account has been flagged as non-compliant with the LiteracyNow! program. Any questions should be directed to one of the library's employees."

Joe blinked. Perplexed, he rose from his chair and meandered his way back to the front desk clerk; the only employee that he knew to be working that day.

His face (now properly warmed) produced a wider smile than before as she finished checking out the books that a small boy and his mother had selected.

"Good morning, Margaret."

She turned and returned his greeting.

"Good morning, Mr. Williams. How's Helen?"

"She's just peachy. But if I have to sit through one more movie about heartbreak, jealousy, infidelity, or soulmates, I might just croak."

As Margaret gave a knowing and mischevious smile, he continued.

"The computer wouldn't let me sign in. There's some program I'm... non-compliant with?"

As her fingers played over the spines of a stack of book; likely searching for a specific title, she shrugged a little and responded in a peppy tone.

"Oh, that's just LiteracyNow. Let me check the system, it's probably just a glitch."

She spent a few moments punching the keyboard in front of her with a speed that made Joe's head spin and then her expression sombered slightly before she punched a few more keys.

"The system says you haven't checked out a book in over seven months, Mr. Williams."

"That sounds about right."

Her smiled had all but vanished now, replaced by a look of mild consternation.

"LiteracyNow is a new program to promote traditional literacy in library users."

"Traditional literacy?"

"Books, Mr. Williams. Our state funding is now directly tied to the number of books per day that the library checks out. And we're not allowed to extend other library services to anyone who doesn't check out at least one book a week."

Her tone had become matter-of-fact, perhaps even bitter, as she explained something she apparently believed to be common sense and common knowledge.

"But the library doesn't stock any books that I want to read, Margaret."

"A lack of funding, Mr. Williams. People are reading less and less every year, letting libraries like this slowly fade away. Providing books to the public is the entire purpose of a library."

"But I read all the time."

She seemed genuinely confused at his statment, so he qualified it further.

"I use the book swap down at Neal's."

"Neal's?" she queried, the dismissive scorn in her voice impossible to ignore. "That man wouldn't know Shakespeare from Marlowe if they were standing alive in front of him. He only sells books to turn a profit. Why would you get your books from him?"

"Because he carries books that I like to read. He carries books that lots of people like to read. He may not know Shakespeare, but he knows that you only make money by offering what people want."

"Well, I'm sorry Mr. Williams, but I can't allow you access to other library services unless you check out a book. Why even come in the library if you don't like our books?"

"Because I don't have a computer at home."

"Why don't you try to convince Neal to put one in?" she said, practically snarling.

Blinking again, Joe realized he wasn't going to make any headway in the discussion. Before walking away, though, he asked one more question.

"But Margaret, if I check out a book, how does the library know I'll even read it?"

"Seriously Mr. Williams, what normal person would check out a library book and not read it."

~fin

quote:

Originally posted by SardonicPoet:
Because I'd like the state to offer me that choice?

Is that too simple?

I have no choice to effect which public school programs my tax dollars go to fund, whether I avail myself of those services or not.

I chose to opt back in to one of those services and that's hypocritical?

I'm paying the full share of my tax either way.

If I only benefit from part of what they fund, those who avail themselves of the entire system still come out ahead if you're speakly strictly from a financial point of view.

Sorry, you don't get to pick and choose the "services" that you'd like to use from the public schools and toss the rest. If your kid does not attend classes, then they do not get the benefits of extracurriculars. Is that too complicated?

I pay taxes, too. So do many people who have no children. This is not about dollars, it is about choices. If you choose to remove your child from public schools, then you choose to forfeit the benefits of the extracurricular activities.

quote:

I can see both sides on this one. On the one hand, I think that homeschooled kids should have the opportunity to participate in all the things like football, cheerleading, and band, etc. On the other hand, I think that if you take your kids out of public school, then you take your kids out of public school.

vs

quote:

Sorry, you don't get to pick and choose the "services" that you'd like to use from the public schools and toss the rest. If your kid does not attend classes, then they do not get the benefits of extracurriculars. Is that too complicated?

This is not seeing 'both' sides. You already made up your mind that those kids are not entitled to any participation in a school they don't attend. Fine. State it that way. Don't say you see both sides. You only see your side.
As I said, it won't pass because of money and attitudes. Let's hope the next Tebow or Joe Namath or Michael Jordan follows the traditional path of learning. Otherwise, the world will lose some good athletes.

I agree with LMM though -- for the school systems it all comes down to money...money for the kid being in school, money for the athletic fees etc...

LMM, I see both sides and I stated that, and you quoted it above.

On the one hand, I think that homeschooled kids should have the opportunity to participate in all the things like football, cheerleading, and band, etc.

The kids should be able to do all the stuff that regular kids do. I can see where the parents are coming from on this one. They want their little Billy to be able to play football just like the other little boys. They just don't want to send little Billy to school. So they need to find private enterprises (like churches, YMCA, travel league) to fill the need. Not the schools they have fled.

My beef with that is that it is hypocritical and condensending and insulting to those of us who have our kids in that public school for a homeschooler to waltz in and say "I'd like to take advantage of this part of your school, but the rest of it is not adequate to suit my needs".

Fair enough. If that home school kid pays all the fees, buys the equipment and pays say, an out of school charge like a college does for out of state tuition, would that make a difference?

quote:

Originally posted by T S C:
Big Red Afro - what specific things about the school that your child attended did you have think were bad? What specific things did you do to try and remedy it?

Also, the "I pay my taxes" does NOT cut it. Many people with no children at all pay taxes. Can they go play ball at a school in their district, too?

As to the FL and TN laws allowing kids who attend private schools or are homeschooled to play for the school district where they live, YES that is unfair to the kids that attend the local schools. The curriculum is different - as Big Red Afro pointed out, he's teaching his kids a vastly different material set then the public school children are learning. If the children at the public school must maintain a "C" average in their studies and meet certain attendance requirements, it is comparing apples to oranges to allow a homeschooled child to participate on the same team.

As to allowing a child who attends Mars Hill to play football at Rogers - because Mars Hill does not have football and Rogers does - shouldn't we allow the Waterloo High School kids to play football first?

The schools should not have to bend over backwards for people who have chosen to exclude themsevles.

waterloo does have a football team now but when they didn't , if the tenn. rule was in effect, it would have worked for them. i was using those 2 schools as an example. if a kid at wilson wanted to play golf and wilson did not have a golf team, he /she would be allowed to play at central, for example. in this scenario, how is a school 'bending over backwards' for anybody? please explain that. as for your statement " many people that have no children still pay taxes, can they go play ball at a school in their district?"........there are age limits in high school athletics. adults don't go back to high school!!!

LMM No, I would not be in favor of homeschooled kids coming to my daughter's school and playing ball, taking art, marching in the band even if they paid for everything out of pocket. To me it is not about money. Imagine that. It is about the principle of the matter. If you choose to not send your kid to the local public school, then you choose to forfeit the benefits of public schooling - one of which is extra curricular activities. Another of which is free lunch. Can the homeschooled kids in the school district drop by for lunch if they qualify for free or reduced priced meals? Or hey, can they just come in and eat with the students every day for some social time? Stop by and see the school nurse, get a little guidance counselling... That is disruptive and I am very much against it.

mackadoo, I think that if a student in the Lauderdale County School system (for example) wants to play a sport that is not offered at their school than that is too bad. The scenario that your portray is asking for all kinds of abuses. How about we decide to have Central and LCHS keep their football teams and all the other county schools drop theirs? Then we can have two big football powerhouses when the kids from all the other county schools go to play for one of the two teams we keep. See the problem there?

I'm in favor of allowing kids to take classes at other schools within their district, but when you start messing with athletics you are opening a can of worms and asking for corruption and scandals.

quote:

start messing with athletics you are opening a can of worms and asking for corruption and scandals.

Like it isn't already? LOL.
Sports is TOO much of an issue at the public schools. The star players get star treatment, with rules being bent or even broken to make sure that Johnny throws that football or Nancy cheers that night. It goes on at all schools at all levels. The academic awards amount to a 15 minute handout at 8:30 in the morning while the sports kids have a full banquet and award ceremony. Schools are rated by their teams not by their kids.
Don't worry about some poor home school kid sneaking in your school to steal a lunch. They won't. They know better.

Gee, I kind of thought that's what happened when Coffee and Bradshaw merged into Florence High

quote:

Originally posted by T S C:
mackadoo, I think that if a student in the Lauderdale County School system (for example) wants to play a sport that is not offered at their school than that is too bad. The scenario that your portray is asking for all kinds of abuses. How about we decide to have Central and LCHS keep their football teams and all the other county schools drop theirs? Then we can have two big football powerhouses when the kids from all the other county schools go to play for one of the two teams we keep. See the problem there?
.

quote:

Originally posted by LMM:

quote:

start messing with athletics you are opening a can of worms and asking for corruption and scandals.

Like it isn't already? LOL.
Sports is TOO much of an issue at the public schools. The star players get star treatment, with rules being bent or even broken to make sure that Johnny throws that football or Nancy cheers that night. It goes on at all schools at all levels. The academic awards amount to a 15 minute handout at 8:30 in the morning while the sports kids have a full banquet and award ceremony. Schools are rated by their teams not by their kids.
Don't worry about some poor home school kid sneaking in your school to steal a lunch. They won't. They know better.

I am aware that there are currently problems in high school athletics. So why compound it?

My school devoted several hours to honoring academic achievement. I'm sorry that you haven't found a school that does likewise. Perhaps you should get involved with the school and make those types of changes... oh wait, your kids don't attend a school. So what is your beef?

And as to your last statement, I never said anything about stealing. We were discussing people being able to take advantage of services offered by the schools even if they did not attend those schools. The free / reduced price lunch program, school nurses, guidance counselors, and extra-curricular activities are all services outside of academics that are offered to students. They are all services that I personally do not believe that any child who does not attend the school should be allowed to use.

quote:

Originally posted by T S C:
We were discussing people being able to take advantage of services offered by the schools even if they did not attend those schools. The free / reduced price lunch program, school nurses, guidance counselors, and extra-curricular activities are all services outside of academics that are offered to students. They are all services that I personally do not believe that any child who does not attend the school should be allowed to use.

you still haven't convinced me WHY you believe that?

do their parents not pay school taxes?

So what's the difference between a homeschooler being able to participate in sports (or maybe in some cases an academic class)in public school and allowing students (homeschool and public) to dual enroll in college. Honestly, I don't see much difference - each is taking advantage of something their current situation doesn't or can't offer.

quote:

My school devoted several hours to honoring academic achievement. I'm sorry that you haven't found a school that does likewise. Perhaps you should get involved with the school and make those types of changes... oh wait, your kids don't attend a school. So what is your beef?

I see, so a home school parent cannot converse on the topic of kids participating in public school activities? I thought that was the point of your thread. You are right. My kids are out. They attended an elementary school which I was co-Pres of the PTO. Involved enough for you? The high school was another story.
I get it. Unless the kids have to sweat through all the tests, projects, and put up with the same BS that you do, they don't rate the ability to participate in any off campus or after school studies. That's fine. It may interest you to know that home school activities can be participated in by anyone. Several families have one in and one out of public school and they can all take the field trips and visit sites together.
My kids did not do sports at the elementary level due to the cost that you spelled out so well. I did not have several thousand extra laying around each year.
I am glad you love public school.
I did what was best for MY kids as I am sure you are doing the same.