• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

Local High School...Limestone gets bad news..

tornado said:
So in the end....why all the concern over the privates doing it....when it is overwhelmingly the public schools doing it.......?
Click to expand...

I wouldnt say the evidence is overwhelming that the publics are doing it---the evidence is overwhelming that the publics get CAUGHT doing it. I dont have a dog in this fight. But, for full disclosure I am a public school advocate. That being said, I think the answer to the question is easy--it's easier to prove.

Most public schools are designed by districts, housing boundaries, etc. For most public schools you have to live in District A to attend school A. It's much more cut and dried. If a kid lives in District B and somehow attends school at school A then, obviously, there is a red flag.

Meanwhile most private schools can get kids from District A, B, C, D, and so on. So if a kid lives in District A, and was at school A but then transfers to private school X, thats fine. He has that right. There are no regulations there based on housing, zoning, etc.

A good example of this, Springfield Sacred Heart Griffin (and I am not accusing them of recruiting). A decent amount of SHG kids don't live in Springfield proper. They live in surrounding smaller towns like Pleasant Plains, Riverton, Rochester, etc. So if a kid leaves the Pleasant Plains school district and enrolls at SHG--so what. No red flag there. There aren't boundaries.

But if the kid leaves Pleasant Plains, still resides there, but enrolls at Lanphier then, hmm, questions.

I'm sure most people know this. But the answer is--its easier to prove, track, and note.
 
tornado said:
that is not true...I have my kids in a private school that I sought out and chose, and I never saw the least evidence of recruiting.


And Murph...we are probably on the opposite side of the fence on this but I suspect we both want the same thing...fairness, right?
Click to expand...

Maybe your kids weren't recruited but many are, I know for a fact friends of mine children have been contacted and recruited by privates.

And you speak of fairness.....Like I've said before, let the privates play each other have their own leagues and have their own state tournaments.
 
I went to a private HS school and they would recruit one kid a year to play basketball but the upside was that they knew they were going to recieve a much better education. There is no doubt that some private schools use basketball for PR purposes but if at the end of the day the player recieves a better education who cares.
 
SFP said:
I went to a private HS school and they would recruit one kid a year to play basketball but the upside was that they knew they were going to recieve a much better education. There is no doubt that some private schools use basketball for PR purposes but if at the end of the day the player recieves a better education who cares.
Click to expand...

The assumption there is that the education is better at the private school. That's not always the case.
 
tornado said:
whoa.......that comment stuns me....as it is the public schools who spend way, way more money per student than the privates.
The private school my kid goes to can educate a student for between $4,000-$5,000 each. This is known for certain since the figures are available at budget meetings and there's no place else for the money to come from.

but the private schools are funded at a level of up to $7,000-$8,000 per student and often MUCH more, and they still always complain of being short and want tax hikes and more money. They add athletic fees and other charges and still can't get the job done at $7,000+ per student.
A recent article in Detroit showed how absolutely poor and abysmal the education was in their school district, while the schools were being funded at "$10,576 ??” $2,000 above the state average of $8,561"

The only way to argue where the education is better is the outcome.
Graduation rates, drop out rates, standardized test scores, and the pct. of the seniors who end up going to college are all solid, and undeniable, unfudg-able ways to tell.
Click to expand...

There are ton more factors that go into things like Graduation rates, drop out rates, % of kids going to college, standardized test scores, etc.

Its really all about socio-economics. To say kids that go to an inner city school from a poor socio-economic background is on the same footing as a kid at a private school from a wealther socio-economic background would be wildly inaccurate.

Things like graduation rates, SAT scores, drop out rates, etc. have far more to do with family, socio-economics, etc. than the private/public school debate. If kids with the stable, wealthier backgrounds all went to public schools those numbers would skew. Its less about the school itself and more about the other factors.
 
tornado said:
The only way to argue where the education is better is the outcome.
Graduation rates, drop out rates, standardized test scores, and the pct. of the seniors who end up going to college are all solid, and undeniable, unfudg-able ways to tell.
Click to expand...


Public schools by law must educate all children, including students with special needs.

Private schools are selective. They are not obligated to accept every child, and in many private schools admission is very competitive.
 
tornado said:
I don't disagree...but those kids are in special curriculums and their progress and their costs are not included in most of these studies.
In other words....the very small pct. who are special needs are not what's making the public schools' statistics look so bad.
Those who think so ignore the real problem....
The public schools run badly for much the same way that the Social Security Administration and the Veterans' Administration are so incredibly inefficient.
Give the government a job to do and they'll maybe do it, but inefficiently and at way, way over cost.
Click to expand...

This is a question I have for parents who send their kids to private schools. It is an honest question.

I understand the statistics and repuation of public schools. So why not send your kids there to help IMPROVE the situation, make things better, get things on the right track instead of segregating them and then talking about how bad things are in public schools?

To me being a part of the solution to the mess seems to make more sense than segregating from it. But, again, I don't have kids so I could be way off base.
 
tornado said:
this is the question the public school people should be asking and finding the answer for...
You'd think instead of attending seminars that pat them on the back and tell themselves how great they're doing
and instead of petitioning the government for more money...they'd look at where education is alive and well
and working just fine................but they don't want to hear anything about it.......

........ they are oblivious to what is not only driving people away from public education, they pretend it isn't happening....thus they slide further and further....all the while never bothering to correct the situation...

Kinda like the captain of a ship headed right into the treacherous rocks, all the while saying...
Don't bother me with those reports of how badly we're doing and how much worse things are going to get....
I am sure if we just had a little more state and federal funding, we'll be just fine...

Please....ask that question of the STRONG public school proponents like Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy
....all of whom talk the talk but then send their kids to private schools.....................
Click to expand...

Fair point. But I guess the question is this. Do parents send their kids to private schools soly because the education is "better"? Or is because they want a faith based education? Or, let's be honest, they don't want their kids interacting with minorities? Or kids with different backgrounds?

I wish I could say it was always the first reason--but I'm not so sure. It really is segregation all over again if you look at it. But, I admit I am an outsider in this and I grew up in a household with two public school teachers as parents.
 
tornado said:
B]Please....ask that question of the STRONG public school proponents like Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, etc...
....all of whom talk the talk but then send their kids to private schools.....................[/B]
Click to expand...

If I had Barack's Blackberry email address I most certainly would. :) Same for Clinton. I agree, they should walk the walk as well.
 
leebiddlecome said:
This is a question I have for parents who send their kids to private schools. It is an honest question.

I understand the statistics and repuation of public schools. So why not send your kids there to help IMPROVE the situation, make things better, get things on the right track instead of segregating them and then talking about how bad things are in public schools?

To me being a part of the solution to the mess seems to make more sense than segregating from it. But, again, I don't have kids so I could be way off base.
Click to expand...

Why would a parent in Dunlap send their kid to a private school? Academically, they have a few of the top 50 schools in the state.. Yet, some do send their kids to a private.

I think the problem is more related to the ACLU banning the proper moral foundation of education. You can have the smartest individuals running banks, Wall Street brokerages, but without a moral foundation the whole thing collapses...
 
ph said:
Why would a parent in Dunlap send their kid to a private school? Academically, they have a few of the top 50 schools in the state.. Yet, some do send their kids to a private.

I think the problem is more related to the ACLU banning the proper moral foundation of education. You can have the smartest individuals running banks, Wall Street brokerages, but without a moral foundation the whole thing collapses...
Click to expand...

What did the ACLU ban regarding the "proper moral foundation of education?"
 
That is silly. How can anyone think that they speak for the millions of people who want some control over their kids' education?

I don't believe it has anything to do with race. It has everything to do with the quality of education, which is poor and getting worse in the public schools, and the accountability of the school and teachers, which is non-existent in the public schools.
 
Da Coach said:
That is silly. How can anyone think that they speak for the millions of people who want some control over their kids' education?

I don't believe it has anything to do with race. It has everything to do with the quality of education, which is poor and getting worse in the public schools, and the accountability of the school and teachers, which is non-existent in the public schools.
Click to expand...

Da Coach. No one is speaking for millions. And if people want control over their kids' education great. Parents have some control in all educational settings.

But to say it has NOTHING to do with race is very, very, very naive. Come on man. Its 2009. Let's talk as adults here.

I do ask again. Why not send your kids to the public schools to make the situation better instead of segregating and then complaining about how bad it is on the other side?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top