HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » The Texas Senate approved...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue May 7, 2013, 02:58 PM

The Texas Senate approved something called the Tim Tebow Bill, and it’s a big deal

Source: Dallas Morning News via Yahoo

The Texas Senate passed the Tim Tebow Bill to allow home-schooled student-athletes to play for their local public schools in the Lone Star State, according to multiple reports.

The bill, which passed the Senate by a decisive 21-7 vote on April 25, now rests with the Texas House before it's signed into law, according to The Dallas Morning News. If the bill is successful there, it will open the doors for many home-schooled athletes in Texas.


Read more: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highschool-prep-rally/texas-senate-approves-something-called-tim-tebow-bill-212158312.html



I think this is a shame. "I'm too good to go to school with you, but I want a spot on your football team".

and who doesn't think that High Schools will somehow "recruit" these home-schooled kids who are good enough to give them a shot at a championship?

If you want to play sports for your local High School, then why NOT REQUIRE THEY ATTEND SAID HIGH SCHOOL

BTW - I'm not entirely against home-schooling, although I'm willing to bet that in 85% of the cases, it's "fundy-rightwing nutjobs" that are proponents of it, and that 85% teach their kids that the earth is 6,000 years old and Jesus road dinosaurs.

But if you are going to go the home-school route, why shouldn't you have to go "all in".

97 replies, 10546 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 97 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Texas Senate approved something called the Tim Tebow Bill, and it’s a big deal (Original post)
maxrandb May 2013 OP
Tx4obama May 2013 #1
cprise May 2013 #10
surrealAmerican May 2013 #58
freshwest May 2013 #73
Igel May 2013 #90
freshwest May 2013 #93
murielm99 May 2013 #85
dlwickham May 2013 #94
AndyA May 2013 #2
DallasNE May 2013 #8
winterpark May 2013 #16
get the red out May 2013 #29
Igel May 2013 #91
guyton May 2013 #3
TheLion May 2013 #4
freshwest May 2013 #74
unblock May 2013 #5
Blue_Tires May 2013 #14
LiberalFighter May 2013 #44
pstokely May 2013 #89
LiberalFighter May 2013 #95
pstokely May 2013 #96
LiberalFighter May 2013 #97
jmowreader May 2013 #56
joeglow3 May 2013 #6
LiberalFighter May 2013 #45
joeglow3 May 2013 #54
RevStPatrick May 2013 #7
Myrina May 2013 #9
joeglow3 May 2013 #11
MotherPetrie May 2013 #12
joeglow3 May 2013 #13
MotherPetrie May 2013 #36
joeglow3 May 2013 #55
Myrina May 2013 #15
joeglow3 May 2013 #24
hamsterjill May 2013 #28
JNelson6563 May 2013 #19
joeglow3 May 2013 #21
JNelson6563 May 2013 #23
SunSeeker May 2013 #26
elehhhhna May 2013 #53
SunSeeker May 2013 #34
joeglow3 May 2013 #64
SunSeeker May 2013 #68
joeglow3 May 2013 #72
freshwest May 2013 #75
treestar May 2013 #57
Blue_Tires May 2013 #17
austinlw May 2013 #18
dbackjon May 2013 #20
SunSeeker May 2013 #27
dbackjon May 2013 #31
SunSeeker May 2013 #33
dbackjon May 2013 #37
SunSeeker May 2013 #39
dbackjon May 2013 #41
SunSeeker May 2013 #46
dbackjon May 2013 #48
SunSeeker May 2013 #49
JoePhilly May 2013 #22
dbackjon May 2013 #32
JoePhilly May 2013 #35
dbackjon May 2013 #38
kiranon May 2013 #42
Marrah_G May 2013 #25
Ishoutandscream2 May 2013 #30
TRoN33 May 2013 #40
timdog44 May 2013 #43
Fastcars May 2013 #47
Snake Plissken May 2013 #50
ZombieHorde May 2013 #51
Inkfreak May 2013 #81
searchingforlight May 2013 #52
mac56 May 2013 #59
The Straight Story May 2013 #61
mac56 May 2013 #63
The Straight Story May 2013 #65
mac56 May 2013 #66
Psephos May 2013 #71
mac56 May 2013 #79
Psephos May 2013 #88
Shrek May 2013 #83
noamnety May 2013 #86
duhneece May 2013 #60
ileus May 2013 #62
Dawson Leery May 2013 #67
A Little Weird May 2013 #69
blkmusclmachine May 2013 #70
defacto7 May 2013 #76
mac56 May 2013 #80
dkf May 2013 #77
uriel1972 May 2013 #78
demwing May 2013 #82
sofa king May 2013 #84
hughee99 May 2013 #87
Igel May 2013 #92

Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:01 PM

1. I'm female and have never played football, but don't most schools have a rule that...


... you have to maintain a certain grade point average in order to play on the football team?

If a person is home schooled then there is no way to know what their grade point average is.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Reply #1)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:32 PM

10. Maybe that's why standardized testing is so important

...so people can keep disassociating themselves from public schools without fear their movement will be viewed as a bunch of frauds. That's not to say standardized testing is as good as they think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Reply #1)

Tue May 7, 2013, 08:09 PM

58. This should kill any such eligiblity requirements.

If your school had a star player whose grades were too low, what would keep you from telling his parents to homeschool him, and just keep him on the team as a homeschooled student?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Reply #1)

Wed May 8, 2013, 01:52 AM

73. I thought they had to follow some of the state cirriculum and make reports to the state.

Not sure about it in practice, but at one time I considered home schooling my kid. They said that was what the state expected. The problem is, not all parents have all the prerequisite training to be effective teachers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #73)

Wed May 8, 2013, 06:18 PM

90. Not Texas.

IIRC, a curriculum that includes reading, arithmetic, and some sort of civics is all that's required. No formal curriculum is required--you don't have to buy one or subscribe to one.

I last checked in 2005, but it's a state constitution kind of thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Igel (Reply #90)

Wed May 8, 2013, 06:32 PM

93. '...a curriculum that includes reading, arithmetic, and some sort of civics is all that's required'

which is what I said with the words, 'some of the state cirriculum' that I was offered in the nineties in Texas. They were going to provide the materials to me for free, and check with me, but that was all. I felt socialization was needed, and my kid wanted to keep going despite problems. It didn't work out, but that's life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Reply #1)

Wed May 8, 2013, 11:15 AM

85. So the next big lawsuit can be

some family suing a high school because their kid is not allowed to play because of his grades, but a homeschooled kid is allowed to be an active team member. I can see it now. As much as I dislike the emphasis on sports, I could sympathize with this type of lawsuit. If you don't want to go to school, then don't play school sports. Organize your own damned football team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tx4obama (Reply #1)

Wed May 8, 2013, 07:08 PM

94. excellent point

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:03 PM

2. I believe one of the big problems with education today is the emphasis on SPORTS

Not on learning, but sports. Schools will build new stadiums, gymnasiums, and all the other sports necessities while ignoring the fact that some new books, computers, and things that actually help to educate the students are sorely needed.

Oh...and how about paying the teachers a little better? A good teacher can make all the difference in the classroom, even without adequate supplies.

The focus should be on the education, not the sports.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AndyA (Reply #2)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:21 PM

8. What Does A Football Coach At A Football Power Get Paid

In comparison to, say, the math teacher? Where is the economic justice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AndyA (Reply #2)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:57 PM

16. Ditto and also, what about music and arts programs? Why doesn't this bill include that

home schooled kids can participate in orchestra and band, etc?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to winterpark (Reply #16)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:42 PM

29. YEA!!

Half the fun of being a football player has to be abusing the hell out of all those artsy types.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to winterpark (Reply #16)

Wed May 8, 2013, 06:20 PM

91. And yet this still misses an important point.

One state I lived in--no idea which, at this point--allowed home-schooling parents to have their kids attend little things like labs.

If you *want* to teach you kid biology or chemistry or physics but can't swing the lab requirements, have them cued in to lab schedules at the local high school. Then they show up for the labs.

Now, that would be disruptive. But it would be a good solution to the poverty of some home schooling curricula. And would be returning some of the tax benefits to tax payers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:08 PM

3. NCAA

>If you want to play sports for your local High School, then why NOT REQUIRE THEY ATTEND SAID HIGH SCHOOL

**Snark warning. And almost nobody agrees with me on this, so save the flames**

I've said the same thing about a lot of college athletes. I find it a shame that *students* can't play on their (for example) football team because it's already jammed with pseudo-students who are only there because there's no such thing as a minor-league system for the NFL.

**End snark**

That out of the way, our school district already has a policy like this. It's not the end of the world. Don't know if it's a state-wide thing or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:08 PM

4. Instant legal challenge

 

...with no chance of ever being allowed to operate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheLion (Reply #4)

Wed May 8, 2013, 01:55 AM

74. On what basis?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:10 PM

5. i think the bigger problem is the potential for abuse, e.g., redshirting

a parent could decide to home-school their football star and delay graduation for years to give him multiple shots at the title in the hopes of attracting a big-name college recruiter.

moreover a parent could entirely design a home school schedule around a sports career.

of course, home schooling always give parents latitude to screw up their kid if they're so inclined, but this gives them additional temptation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unblock (Reply #5)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:55 PM

14. That's what I said when this bill was proposed in Virginia...

As if big-time high school sports/college recruiting weren't already corrupt enough (that's who this bill is designed to benefit, lest anyone think it was REALLY about the poor, oppressed home-schooled students)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unblock (Reply #5)

Tue May 7, 2013, 06:20 PM

44. There are age restrictions for high school sports and probably in each state

as well as the national organization. At best, they might delay a student for a year but doubt beyond that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalFighter (Reply #44)

Wed May 8, 2013, 03:40 PM

89. People already delay kindergarten a year so their boys will be bigger in high school

doesn't matter if they 19 and still in high school

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pstokely (Reply #89)

Wed May 8, 2013, 10:14 PM

95. In Texas specifically and most likely in other states it does matter.

For Texas the following applies:

Students are eligible to represent their school in varsity interscholastic activities if they:
• are not 19 years of age or older on or before September 1 of the current scholastic year. (See 504 handicapped
exception.)
• have not graduated from high school.
• are enrolled by the sixth class day of the current school year or have been in attendance for fifteen calendar days
immediately preceding a varsity contest.
• are full-time day students in a participant high school.
• initially enrolled in the ninth grade not more than four calendar years ago.
• are meeting academic standards required by state law.
• live with their parents inside the school district attendance zone their first year of attendance. (Parent residence
applies to varsity athletic eligibility only.) When the parents do not reside inside the district attendance zone the
student could be eligible if: the student has been in continuous attendance for at least one calendar year and has not
enrolled at another school; no inducement is given to the student to attend the school (for example: students or their
parents must pay their room and board when they do not live with a relative; students driving back into the district
should pay their own transportation costs); and it is not a violation of local school or TEA policies for the student
to continue attending the school. Students placed by the Texas Youth Commission are covered under Custodial
Residence (see Section 442 of the Constitution and Contest Rules).
• have observed all provisions of the Awards Rule.
Limitation on Awards. Schools may give one major award, not to exceed $70.00 in value, to a student during high
school enrollment at the same school for participation in one of the UIL interschool competitions listed in Section
18 Pre-Season Regulations
380. One additional symbolic award, not to exceed $10.00 in value, may be presented for participation in each
additional UIL activity listed in Section 380. The $10.00 award may be given to a student for an activity during
the same year that the major award is given for that activity.
• have not been recruited. (Does not apply to college recruiting as permitted by rule.)
• have not violated any provision of the summer camp rule, Section 1209.
• have observed all provisions of the Athletic Amateur Rule, Section 441.


You might notice that the student cannot be 19 on or before September 1
Must have been enrolled in 9th grade not more than 4 years prior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalFighter (Reply #95)

Thu May 9, 2013, 12:30 AM

96. But they can be 19 on Sept 2

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pstokely (Reply #96)

Thu May 9, 2013, 01:07 AM

97. Did I say otherwise??????????????????????????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unblock (Reply #5)

Tue May 7, 2013, 08:03 PM

56. The "moreover"s are already happening, but not in football

We've got people up here (north Idaho) who aren't serious fundies, but who homeschool because the kid is on club teams for soccer, basketball, volleyball or softball, plus does all the sports-academy stuff, in hopes of getting good enough to get a full-ride college athletic scholarship to a high-end school and all the travel those guys do is not conducive to public education.

My worry is that the high schools in Texas will recruit from outside their normal areas. If there is not significant control over where a homeschooler can play football, there is no reason why High School A can't find a superstar in High School B and convin$e his parents to homeschool their son so he would be eligible to play for High School A.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:11 PM

6. So, you create the problem you have with home-schooling

I am not saying you. I know multiple people who home-school and their kids are great. However, one of the biggest problems I hear is "these kids don't get social interactions they need."

THEN, when they are allowed to participate in activities at their local public school that they pay taxes into, people say "bullshit, we should isolate them."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joeglow3 (Reply #6)

Tue May 7, 2013, 06:23 PM

45. The next step would be students attending parochial schools

demanding to play on a public school team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalFighter (Reply #45)

Tue May 7, 2013, 07:40 PM

54. Which courts have ruled in many places they can

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:15 PM

7. This doesn't take into account...

 

...the fact that the home-schooled kids are going to have to eat about a gigaton of shit from the regular school kids, and are probably not going to last long enough to make the team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:24 PM

9. They should have a 'home school team/league' ...

... and have to provide their own coaches, practice facilities, travel arrangements & equipment etc.


Why should they get to bump some kid(s) who are attending the public schools from a sports team?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Myrina (Reply #9)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:38 PM

11. Because they pay property taxes and their kids are entitled to those benefits

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joeglow3 (Reply #11)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:46 PM

12. Tough shit. It was their choice not to attend the school. All or nothing.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #12)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:49 PM

13. We use private school and got speech therapy from our local public school

What is the basis for your view? You don't like parents deciding to home-school or not use a public school and your response is "fuck that kid up his ass?"

VERY Democratic of you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joeglow3 (Reply #13)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:18 PM

36. No, I don't like parents giving the middle finger to the public school system and then expecting it

 

to cater to theirl spawn when they feel like playing a team sport. If the school is not good to educate their kid, then they can take their sports team needs elsewhere, too. Team sports is NOT an essential part of anyone's education and I would just as soon public schools not expend their limited resources on something that is too often at the expense of other more necessary items.

Equating speech therapy with playing a fucking team sport is an odd thing for a parent to do, IMO. Not very Democratic of YOU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #36)

Tue May 7, 2013, 07:48 PM

55. Our parochial schools save the public schools over $200 MILLION a year

If all the kids in parochial schools in our city (20,000) suddenly went to public schools, where the cost to educate a kid is around $12,000 a year, they would need to find over $200 million a year to educate them. Given that the vast majority of the funding comes from property taxes, we are all paying into the system (which I have ZERO problem with).

I see two issues in your post:

1. Should schools pay for sports? That is a separate issue.
2. Should students who do not attend a public schools be able to participate? I don't see a problem.

That said, given how much money we collectively save the public schools here while still paying our property taxes to fund the schools, how exactly are we giving them the middle finger?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #12)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:56 PM

15. Agreed. If it's good enough for sports, it's good enough for education.

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Myrina (Reply #15)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:16 PM

24. what is the logic behind your view?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #12)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:34 PM

28. +1

Well said!

And the argument about paying taxes - - - well, there are plenty of childless couples who pay taxes, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joeglow3 (Reply #11)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:06 PM

19. True, they pay taxes but...

I don't know where you are at but here, in Michigan, the school funding in each district is based on how many students they have. Since the home-schooled kids aren't in on that count the local school district does not receive funding on behalf of that student.

Additionally, many schools have programs that need to be augmented with fundraising and fees to the student/parents.

Julie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JNelson6563 (Reply #19)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:14 PM

21. The vast majority of funding comes from local property taxes

I would bet it is much cheaper for the district and better for other students if a kid is home-schooled, the district gets its local property taxes, but not the state funding and has to allow this kid play football than if the kid is enrolled full-time and they get the additional state funding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joeglow3 (Reply #21)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:16 PM

23. Ok, apparently it's different in Michigan

than where-ever you are.

Julie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JNelson6563 (Reply #23)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:31 PM

26. CA only gives schools money based on number of students enrolled AND actually attending classes.

As far as I understand it, all public schools work that way. Homeschooled kids would use the resources of the school (i.e. football facilities and staff) without the school getting paid to compensate for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JNelson6563 (Reply #19)

Tue May 7, 2013, 07:38 PM

53. SAME IN TEXAS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joeglow3 (Reply #11)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:54 PM

34. Their property taxes don't go to the school unless their kid is ATTENDING CLASSES at the school.

Schools are funded according to how many kids attend class each day. In CA, that amounts to $40/student/day. In fact, even if a student is enrolled, if that student does not come to school that day, the school does not get $40 for that student that day. Homeschoolers never come to class, so the school never gets funding for that kids, even if the parents pay property taxes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #34)

Tue May 7, 2013, 09:32 PM

64. Then, it varies by state

Here, the funding is collected within the district. Thus, there is no where else to send the money. It all goes to the district where the residence is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joeglow3 (Reply #64)

Tue May 7, 2013, 10:29 PM

68. Arizona law, like other states, funds schools based on attendance, regardless of property taxes.

The Arizona legislature went into great detail to define what attendance means, none of which include homeschooled kids: http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/15/00901.htm

The same rule applies for Arizona state charter schools: "Charter schools are funded by the state and receive money based on student enrollment and attendance." http://www.asbcs.az.gov/parent_resources/brochure_faq.asp

Although some districts have convinced local property owners to pay special assessments to help fund local schools, it is not enough. Arizona is a dismal 46th in the nation in per student spending. That effect is compounded by attendance-based ("per-student") funding when AZ schools lose students, whether to homeschooling or loss of school-age population (such as from home foreclosures as a result of recession):
When schools lose students, they also lose per-student state funds while overhead costs, such as air-conditioning, food service and transportation, remain steady.
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/02/27/20110227arizona-public-school-funding-recession.html#ixzz2SfDCkitH

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #68)

Wed May 8, 2013, 01:28 AM

72. We actually live in the highest taxed district in the state

People always approve special assessments. And we don't use the schools... But mom is happy, so I am happy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #34)

Wed May 8, 2013, 02:09 AM

75. Yes, this is a major factor in maintaining all school activities, including sports.

That loss is a reason why schools demand kids that are enrolled go to school on time, too. If they are not in their homeroom class at a certain time, the school isn't paid, even if they show up and attend all the classes later.

At least that was the way it was when I attended in Texas. The morning roll call determined the amount the state paid the school to operate in its entirety. If these kids just show up for one class or after school for sports, the school is not getting paid for it...

Unless this new law counts their showing up past the tardy time, but still pays for the entire day. Which I doubt that they have the money for, since they are laying people off. I think this is just more to hurt the public schools where they have laid off so many teachers, not based on school failures, even though the number of students has not gone down.

Possibly charter school lobbyists are pushing this in order to make their case for more profit as the public schools go without.

JMHO. Not a school employee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joeglow3 (Reply #11)

Tue May 7, 2013, 08:05 PM

57. So do people who send their kids to private school

So if those kids don't make the teams on the private school, they should be able to play for a public school team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Myrina (Reply #9)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:58 PM

17. You don't even need that when you have the AAU

and other amateur recreational sports available in *EVERY* community for all age groups

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:02 PM

18. Going to be interesting

to see how they intend to reconcile this with Texas' pretty strict no-pass, no-play rule. I predict lawsuits from parents due to the potential for unfairness when their kid who fails 1 class can't play for several weeks while all the home-schooled ones can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:08 PM

20. Why is it a big deal?

Arizona has had this rule for decades. Works fine. Kid is allowed on campus only to participate in the activity.

Arizona also allows home-schooled kids to take specific subject (i.e. Chemistry) if there is space available after full-time students have registered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dbackjon (Reply #20)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:32 PM

27. Does the school get extra funding to cover the homeschoolers' use of the facilities? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #27)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:46 PM

31. For the classes, yes

And if there is an activities fee, the parents have to pay that as well.


The State will add them as a 1/6 (or whatever %) of a student in the funding formulas. This is why most of the school districts don't mind, if there are 15 or 16 students in Chem it costs the same, but gets the extra funding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dbackjon (Reply #31)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:50 PM

33. So the homeschoolers' use of the rec facilities goes unfunded? That hurts the rest of the kids.

It is also not fair to the kids who have to maintain a GPA to stay on the sports teams.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #33)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:19 PM

37. No - at least in most districts, you have to pay an activity fee to use the facilities/programs

Whether band, chorus, or sports, the student has to pay extra.

As for the actual physical building, those are built via property tax or state funding, so everyone, whether they have kids or not, are paying for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dbackjon (Reply #37)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:28 PM

39. But the school's students also pay those fees, on top of funding the school by their attendance.

That attendance-based funding goes toward building maintenance, paying for sports staff, etc. AND they have to maintain a minimum GPA to play, unlike the homeschoolers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #39)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:44 PM

41. Property Taxes

Which all residents pay the building costs.

Activity Fee is geared towards those extra costs.


I know the schools in Flagstaff had requirements for the homeschoolers to stay eligible.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dbackjon (Reply #41)

Tue May 7, 2013, 06:23 PM

46. Property taxes don't pay for upkeep and operation, attendance does.

And it appears there are no special "requirements" for homeschoolers in Arizona, unlike other states. http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/Issues/E/Equal_Access.pdf

Over half of all states, like CA, don't let homeschoolers participate in a school's extra-curricular activities, for the reasons I've mentioned, among others. http://voices.yahoo.com/reasons-why-few-states-allow-home-schooled-students-368230.html

Do you have any links about the "requirements" you mention? I am assuming if there are any, it does not involve maintaining a grade point average or paying the school what it would get if that student was attending classes. That being the case, it is simply unfair to let the homeschooler participate in extra-curricular activities at the school.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #46)

Tue May 7, 2013, 06:41 PM

48. My experience was limited to Flagstaff

And they did, at the time. I had a friend whose kids were homeschooled, but participated in classes and band.

If you actually READ the appendix to your link, you will see that they have to meet the same requirements as regular students, so that would INCLUDE academic progress.

You are not READING my posts, or are unwilling to understand them.

Did I say they had to pay the full amount of what the state support is? NO. But if there are activitiy fiees, which pay for these activilties, they have to pay them.


I am done with you, since you don't seem to understand basic explanations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dbackjon (Reply #48)

Tue May 7, 2013, 07:25 PM

49. I did read your posts and the links. Arizona does not have any special requirements.

Since homeschooled students don't get grades the way public school students do, they can't and don't comply with the minimum GPA requirements of public school students. Seems like in Arizona, they just let them slide. The link does not describe any special requirements for Arizona homeschoolers, i.e. they're treated as if they already got the grades and generated the attendance funding that public school students do. That is what I am saying is unfair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:15 PM

22. Can my daughter attend one public school for academics but play sports for another public school?

It would seem to me that under this law, I should be able to send my daughter to one public school because it is strong academically, but then have her play sports for a different school because they have better coaches or sports facilities and programs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #22)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:47 PM

32. Not same situation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dbackjon (Reply #32)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:01 PM

35. Why not? Get your education in one location, participate in sports at another.

If a home school kid gets to select their academic experience and have it be separate from their athletic experience, why can't everyone else?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #35)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:21 PM

38. Because one is a formal school, the other is a home

It is pretty obvious what the difference is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #22)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:58 PM

42. Would make an interesting legal argument and could be an

unintended consequence of this proposed law. I'm sure someone will make the challenge along these lines who wants his/her child to play on a bigger/better team than their home school has. Schools will like the idea of having their pick of athletes from a larger pool. And ... this is Texas where football is everything. Lawsuits are built on differences/distinctions in opportunities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:17 PM

25. Kids in Public HS here have alot of rules on what makes them eligible to play.

I wonder if TX does and if so, how will the coaches monitor grades and behavior?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marrah_G (Reply #25)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:45 PM

30. We have no pass, no play

And that's another can of worms to consider. Good call, Marrah.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:39 PM

40. It doesn't have to take it to be the right wing to...

home-school America's children. My wife and I are very liberal. My wife is a teacher and her English are obviously far more superior over mine but I can understood the concept of the importance of home-school our two sons. Its because our school district are being bought by Koch brothers and Monsanto to ensure that the schools would have to follow their preference of educational system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 06:04 PM

43. I found an article about home schooling and sports

from a home schooling site. It delineates the states where it can happen. It leaves it up to individual schools in others. And also talk the pros and cons. I do not have a personal opinion on it. I do know a number of home schooled kids, and most are not really interested it sports. More interest in the arts. And the kids are usually very intelligent and well adjusted. Anyway here is the article for those interested.

http://www.home-school.com/Articles/can-homeschoolers-participate-in-public-school-programs.php

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 06:33 PM

47. I can't imagine they could play for a school outside their district....

I live in Louisiana, a state almost as football mad as Texas, and I would be willing to bet that the home schooled students can't play for any school they want and would limited to trying out for the team of the shool that they would attend if they weren't home schooled. If not there would be a ton of superstar athletes gettting "home shooled" so they could play for the regional powerhouse team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 07:31 PM

50. Why are people surprised that football is more important than education in Texas?

Seriously, how can anyone be surprised by this? Other than they left out a clause with allowed inmates in correctional facilities to be considered 'homeschooled"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 07:35 PM

51. Public schools are for the kids.

I have no problem with this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ZombieHorde (Reply #51)

Wed May 8, 2013, 08:14 AM

81. I wish you had the last word on this subject.

Seems to sum it up nicely. I see alotta nitpicking & assumptions about homeschoolers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 07:37 PM

52. Home schooling parents pay taxes and should be able to avail themselves of some school activities.

I think that any opportunity that allows these kids to be exposed to new ideas is a good thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to searchingforlight (Reply #52)

Tue May 7, 2013, 08:19 PM

59. So if they pay the taxes, why don't they send their kids to public schools for the full package?

They opted out. Now they want to have their cake and eat it too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mac56 (Reply #59)

Tue May 7, 2013, 08:35 PM

61. Why have the whole package when part of it is broken?

From zero tolerance crap to getting suspended for pointing a pencil at someone to violence and bullying. Is it any wonder more and more people home school?

Look at it this way - you can pay $x to use the full benefits package or only a small part of it. Either way you are paying.

I tend to be pro-choice in many things and see it as a progressive value in general. Finding ways to punish people we see as sinners for not following our own personal beliefs just don't seem right and at the worst very controlling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Reply #61)

Tue May 7, 2013, 09:22 PM

63. Soo.... cherry-pick the parts you don't think are "broken"?

What a swell luxury to enjoy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mac56 (Reply #63)

Tue May 7, 2013, 09:54 PM

65. When it comes to your kids, maybe a crappy school and education is no biggie to some

And other parents can do the same - they have choices. Choices are usually something people in life want for themselves and others.

Not everybody of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Reply #65)

Tue May 7, 2013, 10:21 PM

66. Just because they "can" doesn't mean they "should."

Sometimes the most profound lessons taught in school aren't in textbooks.

Add on edit: as someone posted upthread, if the school is good enough for sports, it's good enough for education.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mac56 (Reply #66)

Tue May 7, 2013, 11:29 PM

71. So you aren't pro-choice.

And sometimes the most profound lessons taught in a shitty school scar a kid for life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Psephos (Reply #71)

Wed May 8, 2013, 07:01 AM

79. You keep using that word.

I do not think it means what you think it means.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mac56 (Reply #79)

Wed May 8, 2013, 02:55 PM

88. Umm, I only posted once in here.

Which suggests you aren't reading very closely.

Meanwhile, thousands of faceless kids in horrible schools continue to learn "profound" lessons every day. Lessons that will screw them over later in life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mac56 (Reply #66)

Wed May 8, 2013, 08:51 AM

83. "if the school is good enough for sports, it's good enough for education."

You say that as though it's axiomatic, but it's not.

It's entirely possible that an academically substandard school could have a superior athletic program.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mac56 (Reply #59)

Wed May 8, 2013, 11:19 AM

86. I don't understand your logic.

We all pick and chose the public services we're going to use, based on our particular needs.

If I send 90% of my mail FedEx, I'm still entitled to receive my mail from the US postal service.
If I opt not to use the city bus, I'm still allowed to drive on the public roads.
If I have a small kitchen fire and put it out myself instead of calling the fire department, I'm still allowed to use the ambulance service.

It feels very wrong to argue that if you don't use every last bit of ALL the public services you are entitled to, you shouldn't be allowed access to any.

That's not what "public" means.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 08:19 PM

60. I agree with you with that 85% estimate

of home-schooled kids being from a rw, fundy background...but disagree that it's a shame. I think its always a good thing for kids from rw, fundy families and/or communities to be exposed to others. Maybe those personal interactions change the way we see 'the other.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 08:38 PM

62. This could be the only normal social behavior they get exposed to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 10:23 PM

67. Eliminate school sports.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dawson Leery (Reply #67)

Tue May 7, 2013, 10:55 PM

69. +1 million n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 11:09 PM

70. Home skool jocks living off the public school teat.

Hypocrites

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 02:21 AM

76. But it's a chance to

Evangelize!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to defacto7 (Reply #76)

Wed May 8, 2013, 07:03 AM

80. ^ THIS ^

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 02:39 AM

77. The reaction to this idea seems pretty petty to me.

 

What's the big deal in giving people who pay taxes something in return. It's a small portion of what they are entitled to after all.

It's not like these kids are going to be geniuses if only they don't play football.

And with an obese population shouldn't we be encouraging more participation in sports? I don't know what good it does to have a fundy kid getting all fat sitting in front of the TV. Let them play.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 03:24 AM

78. Umm representing a school they don't attend...

Seems a little odd to me and unfair to the kids who do attend and want to get on the team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 08:27 AM

82. " I'm not entirely against home-schooling" - really?

Then why the hell write this?

I think this is a shame. "I'm too good to go to school with you, but I want a spot on your football team".


Just a bunch of bullshit...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 09:35 AM

84. And Vonnegut says, "told ya so."

Why stop there? Why not front a line of five 22 year old behemoths who are home-studying for their GEDs and trying out for the NFL every spring?

Kurt Vonnegut was perfectly attuned to this sort of idiocy, and while he's talking about college ball, the logical conclusions of this policy might very well be the same.

From Player Piano:

Doctor Roseberry was inclined to react ironically to the last line of the song. "Certainly, victorious last year, four years afore that," he muttered in his pregnant solitude. But here was another year that might not look so hot inlaid in rosewood. "Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow," he said wearily. Every coach in the Ivy League was out to knock him down to a PE-003 again, and two losses would do it. Yale and Penn were loaded. Yale had floated a bond to buy the whole Texas A&M backfield, and Penn had bought Breslaw from Wisconsin for $43,000.

Roseberry groaned. "How the hell long they think a man can play college football?" he wanted to know. Six years before, Cornell had bought him from Wabash College, and asked him to list his idea of a dream team. Then, by God they'd bought it for him.

"But what the hell they think they bought?" he asked himself. "Sumpin' made outa steel and see-ment? Supposed to last a lifetime, is it?" They hadn't bought him so much as a water boy since, and the average age of the Big Red was now close to thirty-one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 12:01 PM

87. We do this in Massachusetts now and I haven't seen any problems with it.

If you go the home-school route, why SHOULD you have to go "all in"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to maxrandb (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 06:28 PM

92. Strange attitude.

"I'm too good to go to school with you, but I want a spot on your football team."

Most kids who are home-schooled aren't the decision makers. It isn't their choice. Often they object to it.

Many parents who homeschool their kids do so not because their kids are better than the other kids, but for other reasons. They don't like the curriuclum, would prefer that no kid be exposed to it, but can only decide for their own; or they prefer another they'd rather see all kids receive, but can't impose it on any but their own. Or their kid hangs out with a bad crowd and this is a way of exerting control over their kid's behavior when it's legally permissible to do so. In other cases the kid's simply gotten behind and is going to fail. This gives the kid a breather, rescues his year, and allows him to catch up with his peers.

One kid in my class was going to be homeschooled by his PhD father and MS-bearing mother. Kid was brilliant. He was a junior in HS, they were moving anyway, and he was looking forward to it.

Another kid was failing level classes, had remediation classes stacked up waist high, and was going to flunk. He vanished in March. The next year he re-enrolled. His parents made him work his ass off from March until August to catch up. He graduates this year with his class.

This push for state-mandated "one size absolute *shall* fit all" is odd. Authoritarian, even. And certainly oversimplifies things. Moreover, it's unfair and unjust: it imputes motives that in some cases are present but are also lacking in many, if not a majority, of cases.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread