Spy Car Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 A flawed but understandable logic....with Florida it has been shown that less than 3% of homeschoolers take the opportunity. In our state that is less than one-2 kids per county....I can guarantee you that the parents of academically or behaviorally expelled students will not go through the hoops to 'show' their child is being homeschooled...they can only try out in the school they are zoned to and I am sure they have written it in that a student expelled must show a period of grades before being allowed back in. Some states also accept standardized testing as proof of eligibility... If you look at those states that have had it for over a decade, the incidence of abuse is negligible...the best real world test. There are no "hoops" in the Alabama Tim Tebow bill. A parent signs a paper saying their child is "eligible" and it is the end of discussion. A parent has to prove nothing. That is not a reasonable solution for establishing academic eligibility. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeacefulChaos Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 I don't know why they should. We make the choice to take our children out of public school and teach them at home. I don't think the public schools owe us the right to pick and choose which activities our dc will participate in, regardless of the taxes we pay. :iagree: I don't have a particularly strong opinion on this, but I don't see why we would choose to have anything to do with the public school system that we chose to take our kids out of. It just doesn't make any logical sense to me. Taxes don't make any difference to me. I don't care if they are 'getting my money'. Good for them. It really doesn't have anything to do with me. That's just how it works - by choosing to leave the public schools, IMO, we chose to leave it ALL. Not get to pick and choose like at a buffet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThisIsTheDay Posted January 25, 2012 Author Share Posted January 25, 2012 To the OP-if you live in the US, you are supporting the school with your tax dollars. That was covered back in the beginning. If you think I said I am not supporting the school with my tax dollars, you misread. You are still bound by the regulations of your particular state and cannot legally 'opt out'. If by 'opt out' you mean you are homeschooling under the radar (without proper reporting) then that is a different situation and not one that I would recommend. You are wrong. My state law permits one to "opt out" by claiming religious exemption one time, and you do not need to file any notice from that point on. You are thereby "under the radar" and legally no longer bound by the state regulations. (And no, I have not claimed religious exemption.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In2why Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 That was covered back in the beginning. If you think I said I am not supporting the school with my tax dollars, you misread. You are wrong. My state law permits one to "opt out" by claiming religious exemption one time, and you do not need to file any notice from that point on. You are thereby "under the radar" and legally no longer bound by the state regulations. (And no, I have not claimed religious exemption.) Yep. In Virginia once you claim religious exemption you are done forever. No more yearly notifications, curricula submissions, or testing. No regulations whatsoever. But I would assume that if you chose RE you wouldn't then participate, although one of the families I know that wanted their boys to play FB and went with the public school option of K-12, were in fact RE until they made this choice. I can't imagine how they could justify going back to RE if they wanted to. (Another prime example of how sports can change convictions) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucy the Valiant Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 My single reason for thinking that ps should extend sports opportunities to my kids is that I pay taxes. Lots and lots of taxes, and in our small town, if there *IS* a high school team, then there *ISN'T* a town leage (for that sport). So it's either - sports at the ps, or none (group sports) at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiku Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 We can move into hypothetical discussions of other forms of potential abuse My point was that if people want to cheat the system, they will find a way. Homeschooling parents are not inherently more unethical and dishonest than other parents, and since homeschooling and public schooling are so different, I don't think that one single way of certifying eligibility for all students is practical. Homeschooling and public schooling are not "equal" in method so they can't be "equal" in assessment. Tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 There are no "hoops" in the Alabama Tim Tebow bill. A parent signs a paper saying their child is "eligible" and it is the end of discussion. A parent has to prove nothing. That is not a reasonable solution for establishing academic eligibility. Bill But it works in florida. As a previous person stated, there are only a very few homeschool kids that play sports. The law has been in place here for quite a while. What you are saying you are afraid of has not happened here. And no, we don't have to prove any grades or what not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 My point was that if people want to cheat the system, they will find a way. Homeschooling parents are not inherently more unethical and dishonest than other parents, and since homeschooling and public schooling are so different, I don't think that one single way of certifying eligibility for all students is practical. Homeschooling and public schooling are not "equal" in method so they can't be "equal" in assessment. Tara I made the same point some post back where I said that my opinion was home school students should not necessarily have to pass the same exact tests as public school students, but rather demonstrate a general competence in subjects. How best to do this would take some work, but where there is a will there's a way. On the first point, my concern wasn't that home school parents are somehow likely to be less ethical, it is that public school parents whose star athletes are facing academic probation might abuse the system by declaring themselves "homeschoolers" when they are nothing of the sort. As I have said repeatedly I favor allowing legitimate home school students the maximum access to public school programs that is possible. But that has to be done in ways that are less likely to cause problems that Alabama's Tim Tebow bill would allow. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrar Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) What if the method of certifying that students are eligible was having someone evaluate a portfolio to assure passing status? In some states, this is already close to the policy for homeschooling in general. If a student in PA or MD or any of the other states requiring that a parent show a portfolio is deemed to be compliant with the law and presumably "passing" the grade, then might that satisfy the need for academic hoops? What if it was like in FL where you can hire a certified teacher to do the evaluation and put a stamp of approval on it? No system is going to be foolproof on either side, of course. Realistically, lots of different people have a chance to evaluate whether an athlete in school is really meeting minimum requirements. I don't think it's totally unfair to have homeschoolers do the same, but I don't think there's a simple test that would do it. And whatever it might be ought to maintain homeschoolers' academic freedom to set our own curriculum. Edited January 25, 2012 by farrarwilliams oopsie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 What if the method of certifying that students are eligible was having someone evaluate a portfolio to assure passing status? In some states, this is already close to the policy for homeschooling in general. If a student in PA or MD or any of the other states requiring that a parent show a portfolio is deemed to be compliant with the law and presumably "passing" the grade, then might that satisfy the need for academic hoops? What if it was like in FL where you can hire a certified teacher to do the evaluation and put a stamp of approval on it? No system is going to be foolproof on either side, of course. Realistically, lots of different people have a chance to evaluate whether an athlete in school is really meeting minimum requirements. I don't think it's totally unfair to have homeschoolers do the same, but I don't think there's a simple test that would do it. And whatever it might be ought to maintain homeschoolers' academic freedom to set our own curriculum. Yes, I agree. Something reasonable. I just looked at Florida's requirements and it is not just a parent signing a form. They have to maintain a portfolio and have several different options to show achievement (including accommodations for those with special needs). I don't know if Florida is the perfect model (or not) but at a superficial glance it seems like a reasonable way to make sure the system is not being abused. That is what is needed. The academic requirements should not be onerous or a roadblock designed to keep kids from participating. They should just make sure that parents can't claim to "homeschool" when all they are doing is using the status to keep an academically ineligible student playing sports while not providing them an education. I don't understand why this is controversial. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalanamak Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 This is the exact reason why one should be allowed to play sports in high school. A average 35 year old is NOT playing tackle football. High school will be the last chance you get to do that.....if it's something you love, why not do it when you can? Not every one wants to play tennis, and frankly, that sport IS offered any many places not related to a school. You won't find many country clubs, or health clubs offering tackle football for it's members. But you can join a tennis league at the local Y. I prefer my taxes go towards physical education that will go with a person through life. For "thrill" stuff, make your own league, pay for your own fields, and hire your own coach. Football is not cheap. Volksmarching is. That a minority of students with the physique for it get so much money piled on their sport (which they do not keep up with later in life) is a waste of my dollars. I used tennis as an example because it is was, last time I look at the data, the sport middle class males were most likely to keep up with into their 50s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalanamak Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Believe me the experience of being a football player is unlike playing another sport I've ever played (rugby comes close, and maybe hockey and lacrosse do as well). Grand! Pay for it yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiku Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) I don't understand why this is controversial. To me it's because you want regulations enforced on all homeschooled athletes to prevent hypothetical abuse by some miniscule fraction of high-school-sports playing kids, those kids-whose-parents-don't-homeschool-them-but-claim-to-because-otherwise-their-kids-would-be-academically-ineligible. That seems like a bogeyman to me. It seems like killing a fly with a sledgehammer. Tara Edited January 25, 2012 by TaraTheLiberator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samiam Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) I prefer my taxes go towards physical education that will go with a person through life. For "thrill" stuff, make your own league, pay for your own fields, and hire your own coach. Football is not cheap. Volksmarching is. That a minority of students with the physique for it get so much money piled on their sport (which they do not keep up with later in life) is a waste of my dollars. I used tennis as an example because it is was, last time I look at the data, the sport middle class males were most likely to keep up with into their 50s. Umm, are you forgetting that you are ALREADY paying for this!??! So guess, what it doesn't matter if YOU prefer to Volksmarch, YOU ARE PAYING FOR YOUR SCHOOLS TO HAVE FOOTBALL. That's a given, and nothing you can do about it unless your school district decides for themselves to stop offering it. The choice is not YOURS so who cares what YOU prefer??? Not your school district, that is for sure. Last I knew, not too many schools offer Volksmarching teams. So that being said, it's there, it's being paid for by you and me, why can't my child utilize it? If we want to talk about a true waste of your tax dollars, let's talk about the fact that your tax dollars help pay for these extracurriculars, and not just talking about football, but all sports including TENNIS, music, arts, and yes, maybe even this Volksmarching that you are keen on, but yet YOUR CHILD can not utilize them (well, unless you are one the states that allow this). Is that not the true waste of your tax dollars????? You give them a chunk of money every single year, turn and walk away, and expect not one single thing to benefit you personally from that money......that is not a waste of your money? Where else in your life do you do that and you are okay with it? Where else do you hand over money and expect not one single thing in return (excepts charities, but then you are giving to a charity so there should not be any expectations). For goodness sake, even tithing to a church has some sort of expectation, doesn't it? Don't you receive some sort of services for tithing? If nothing else, a warm fuzzy from listening to your wise pastor spread the word of God? At least that is a direct benefit, your tithing supports the church, allowing your pastor to be there, which opens the door for a service that you can attend. Would you be okay tithing to a church, but then being told you could not come in and listen to the service, or take your children to Sunday school? Thanks for your money and you are welcome to go sit outside in the parking lot and talk about God with those others that are in the parking lot. We took their tithe too, but aren't allowing them into the service. We will shut the church doors so you can't hear the pastor or worship music. Have fun out there in the parking lot!! Give them money and get nothing but a cold shoulder in return. How is that not a waste of your money? I guess you are justifying it because you don't care for football so what does it matter, right? Now if there was a Volksmarching team that your child wanted to walk with, that was top in the area and all of the other Volksmarchers in your area were half-hearted and no were as good or committed, and your child was a top Volksmarcher, and participating in on this Volksmarch team could potentially open the door to college scholarships, and maybe even allow your child to be come a professional Volsmarcher as an adult...would that you make you feel differently? Silliness. Overall, you are missing the big picture. You are focusing on the fact that some sports don't have a long shelf life. But other sports do, and they are offered by high schools. They open doors to scholarships, and careers. The point is not the specific sport. The point is the money going to the schools and the doors being slammed in the homeschooler's face because they don't attend classes there. It's not just football we are talking about here. Open wider. p.s. When I said "Who cares what you prefer", I wasn't implying that "I don't care about your opinion" but only that your opinion obviously is not taken into consideration when your school district determines what extracurriculars they are funding. The fact that you personally do not think spending money on football is beneficial to all is not something the schools care about.....that was my point, not trying to take this to a snarky level. Edited January 25, 2012 by Samiam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KungFuPanda Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 That is certainly what happens in Europe, where the sports are all community based. I imagine it is the cost and convenience factor. People are willing to schlep their 8 year olds around - by the time they're 15 that gets old. Compare the number of 8 - 10 year olds to the number of 15 - 18 year olds in any sports program and see the results for yourself. (There are 10 times as many 8 - 10 year olds as high schoolers on our local swim team and most of the high schools in the area don't even offer swimming.) Gym class is already down to one semester (in all four years) around here. Hardly daily activity. Teen sports require more time. Of course there are more little kids participating. An eight year old can do dance, cheer, gymnastics, scouts, and art and STILL have time for an education and down time. The extracurriculars might be an hour a week each. Once kids hit the teen years, academics get more rigorous and sports take more time so they have to cut back to one or two interests to do anything well. Add that to the fact that they're TEENS now, with opinions of their own and likely unwilling to sign up for one of everything and the numbers have no choice but to shrink even if the kid is active the same number of hours per week. What if the method of certifying that students are eligible was having someone evaluate a portfolio to assure passing status? In some states, this is already close to the policy for homeschooling in general. If a student in PA or MD or any of the other states requiring that a parent show a portfolio is deemed to be compliant with the law and presumably "passing" the grade, then might that satisfy the need for academic hoops? What if it was like in FL where you can hire a certified teacher to do the evaluation and put a stamp of approval on it? No system is going to be foolproof on either side, of course. Realistically, lots of different people have a chance to evaluate whether an athlete in school is really meeting minimum requirements. I don't think it's totally unfair to have homeschoolers do the same, but I don't think there's a simple test that would do it. And whatever it might be ought to maintain homeschoolers' academic freedom to set our own curriculum. In Maryland, the portfolio demonstrates that regular, thorough instruction was provided, NOT that the child made progress or passed classes. I prefer my taxes go towards physical education that will go with a person through life. For "thrill" stuff, make your own league, pay for your own fields, and hire your own coach. Football is not cheap. Volksmarching is. That a minority of students with the physique for it get so much money piled on their sport (which they do not keep up with later in life) is a waste of my dollars. I used tennis as an example because it is was, last time I look at the data, the sport middle class males were most likely to keep up with into their 50s. But don't all of those peaked-in-high-school football dads end up coaching all of the pee wee and powder puff teams for the next generation? Or coaching school sports? That experience my reach past the individual's own high school career. As for all of the "I pay taxes" arguments, does that mean that homeschoolers who don't own homes or pay income taxes should NOT be allowed to participate???? OK, devil's advocate is going to bed now :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Grand! Pay for it yourself. Most years (Pop Warner) we did. I, for one, am not in favor of destroying High School athletic programs, including football. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrappyhappymama Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Sorry, they are not getting specific funding for my child. I don't get this. By opting out of public school, you haven't given up the right for your child to go to ps forever. If you showed up on the steps tomorrow looking to sign them up, the school would take you. So yes, your tax dollars do in fact fund ps education for your specific child, as long as they live in the school district and meet the age requirements. Choosing not to take advantage of the benefit doesn't negate the fact that it is available to your particular child at any time. I don't think your kids should be entitled to any special treatment either that is denied to all the other tax payers. I have opted out of using the post office when paying all of my monthly bills because I have found a better option...online billing. Since I have opted out of the post office system, does that mean that I can no longer choose to send an occasional letter via the post office system, or did I cancel that opportunity by finding a better day to day solution than the post office? I have opted out of the public school because I have found better educational opportunities outside the public school building. However, I should still be able to choose an activity (especially after school activities) that are taking place at my public school since I am still paying for the service. I agree with this argument. Since I pay taxes, and my children are eligible to attend the local schools, it makes sense to me that they should be eligible to participate in the extracurricular activities as well. Looking at the bill, it may seem like a good fit for Alabama, which seems to be a fairly highly regulated state. If I lived there, I would want equal access since I would already have plenty of intrusion into my homeschool. However in states where there is less interference, I fear that adding homeschoolers (especially making a statute that separates homeschoolers from other private schools) would invite lawmakers to stick their noses where they don't belong. In IL, we are de facto private schools - not by legislation, but by case law. We like the projections we have in being private schools. We tend to fight legislation that threatens our status as private schools. I realize that TX, having similar laws, doesn't seem to have this problem. However, the political environment in TX is very different than IL. In TX, we currently don't have the right as homeschoolers to participate in sports or other school activities. The TX HSLDA folks are very much against it, for the very reasons you outlined. We are also considered private schools and not regulated at all. Many homeschoolers here fear any additional oversight which would almost certainly accompany access to sports and extra activities in schools. If we want to talk about a true waste of your tax dollars, let's talk about the fact that your tax dollars help pay for these extracurriculars... You give them a chunk of money every single year, turn and walk away, and expect not one single thing to benefit you personally from that money......that is not a waste of your money? Where else in your life do you do that and you are okay with it? Where else do you hand over money and expect not one single thing in return (excepts charities, but then you are giving to a charity so there should not be any expectations). I've seen this point made a lot in this thread and elsewhere. However, despite the fact that I personally would like to see homeschoolers have access to PS extracurricular activities, I would never claim to get NO benefit at all from public schools. Whether my own children attend or not, I'd like to believe I am benefiting by having folks around me everyday who were educated in the public school system. Sure, I'd like to benefit even more by a public school system that wasn't so broken in so many ways. But I'd never claim to not benefit at all, especially since I myself went to public school, as did most of my family and friends. If we're going to advocate for open access for homeschoolers, let's not do it by making extreme claims that jeopardize our credibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samiam Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) I've seen this point made a lot in this thread and elsewhere. However, despite the fact that I personally would like to see homeschoolers have access to PS extracurricular activities, I would never claim to get NO benefit at all from public schools. Whether my own children attend or not, I'd like to believe I am benefiting by having folks around me everyday who were educated in the public school system. Sure, I'd like to benefit even more by a public school system that wasn't so broken in so many ways. But I'd never claim to not benefit at all, especially since I myself went to public school, as did most of my family and friends. If we're going to advocate for open access for homeschoolers, let's not do it by making extreme claims that jeopardize our credibility. I don't think any extreme claims are being made. Hmm, while I get the whole philosophical "we are helping society become educated, helping my neighborhood have educated children which benefits everyone in general" thought process, and appreciate it, there still comes a time when it comes down to what do I get for my money? While I would help a neighbor pay their electric bill if there was a time that they really needed help and I had the extra $$ to do it, after a few months of that, I'm going to have to ask the neighbor to somehow help themselves or let's do something in trade, etc. I can't just keep shoveling money at the neighbor and never get anything back. At least let me borrow a cup of sugar once in a while without giving an attitude. So while I rarely complain about paying taxes that are earmarked for education....on the other hand, when that same educational facility gives me the cold shoulder when I asked to use their facilities....I've got to ask myself why I would want to keep helping them? As far as you attending public school, I did as well. How was that paid for? Not sure what the tax system was 20-30 years ago, but if it was the same as it is now, ie property taxes, then didn't your parents, and my parents end up paying for our education in some way? They got something out of the system they put in. Good for you and me, right? How does that trickle down to my money, here and today? I can't keep being held accountable for the everyone's education, including my own thirty years ago. I don't have to keep paying for that today, do I? I should be fine and content with helping pay for the neighborhood children to be educated, while choosing to also pay out of pocket to educate my own children, and be fine and content with not having any access to what my money funds for the neighbor children? I'm paying into the system. I've chosen not to fully utilize the entire system that I pay for. As a matter of fact, I am more than willing to let them do whatever they want with a good chunk of the money I give them, use however they deem necessary AND I am still willing to put more money in, to utilize their extracurriculars. And as a matter of fact, I am more then willing and understand why I will continue to pay into the school system when my own children are long gone out of my house and paying their own taxes. But the door slammed in my face because I chose NOT to utilize all of the funds I put in and actually save them money. If the schools do not want my children to utilize their services partially, it's either all or none for them, then please, none, and let me have my money back. Then I have no argument, right? I mean, really if your point here is that I do benefit from the public school system somehow, I'd have to laugh. Maybe you like to meet some of my neighborhood children. Knowing the families, I'm willing to guess that most of the ones that do well in school, is because of what happens at home, after school. Edited January 25, 2012 by Samiam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 To me it's because you want regulations enforced on all homeschooled athletes to prevent hypothetical abuse by some miniscule fraction of high-school-sports playing kids, those kids-whose-parents-don't-homeschool-them-but-claim-to-because-otherwise-their-kids-would-be-academically-ineligible. That seems like a bogeyman to me. It seems like killing a fly with a sledgehammer. Tara Not all homeschooled athletes. Just those who wish to participate on public school teams that require public school students to meet academic standards. Nothing that isn't required of any other athlete on a High School team. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Not all homeschooled athletes. Just those who wish to participate on public school teams that require public school students to meet academic standards. Nothing that isn't required of any other athlete on a High School team. Bill While I'm perfectly ok with requiring substantiating of education similar to what my state (PA) has of all homeschoolers, I'll freely admit to seeing more abuse of the student athlete situation from ps students. There are many who are only in school to play - and tend to only show up to school on days they need to be there to play. While failure is supposed to stop them from playing, I pity the teacher who tries to fail a starting player. This doesn't apply to all athletes, of course, but I suspect the numbers are far greater in ps students than they ever would be from hs students who opt to play. My guys don't need to show anything special to be on the chess team, BUT I've been verbally told they've proved their academic snuff - most likely through basic conversation with their coaches. If they wanted to, they could check our annual portfolios I suppose, but I doubt it's ever gone that far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choirfarm Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 I'll freely admit to seeing more abuse of the student athlete situation from ps students. There are many who are only in school to play - and tend to only show up to school on days they need to be there to play. While failure is supposed to stop them from playing, I pity the teacher who tries to fail a starting player. far. And see this is the worry in Texas. In Texas we have NO regulations for homeschooling. To play football in Texas, you must pass your classes. I'm not sure if it is tied to the TAKS test or now the STARR/ EOC exams that start this year. So how would we demonstrate that? By just our transcript. I guarantee you that a lot of ps parents would withdraw their children so they could "homeschool" them. Tara, you say it would only be a small number. I have a feeling in Texas it would be a HUGE number and a HUGE problem. That of course would mean that homeschoolers would need the same kind of testing or accountability as ps... Which is why even though the Texas Homeschool Association tried to get the legislature to allow homeschoolers to participate in extra-curricular, the homeschoolers themselves defeated it.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 PA has a law that homeschoolers can participate. I've yet to hear of abuses. Somewhere out there I suppose there may be some, but I don't think there are huge numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donna Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 While I'm perfectly ok with requiring substantiating of education similar to what my state (PA) has of all homeschoolers, I'll freely admit to seeing more abuse of the student athlete situation from ps students. There are many who are only in school to play - and tend to only show up to school on days they need to be there to play. While failure is supposed to stop them from playing, I pity the teacher who tries to fail a starting player. This doesn't apply to all athletes, of course, but I suspect the numbers are far greater in ps students than they ever would be from hs students who opt to play. My guys don't need to show anything special to be on the chess team, BUT I've been verbally told they've proved their academic snuff - most likely through basic conversation with their coaches. If they wanted to, they could check our annual portfolios I suppose, but I doubt it's ever gone that far. I was just going to say this exact thing. The ps don't have to provide any actual proof that their athletes or anyone else has actually learned anything...hence the need for remedial courses in colleges now when colleges used to be a place for "higher learning." Not saying I have any problem with some sort of proof required for hs kids to participate...just saying whatever that proof happens to be, it should be something all prospective athletes are required to do (if they decide on a test) and should be neutral with regard to the course of study issue (meaning if my student is studying US history that year, he shouldn't have to take a detailed history test on Medieval studies just because ps kids are studying that in the same year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret in GA Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 I prefer my taxes go towards physical education that will go with a person through life. For "thrill" stuff, make your own league, pay for your own fields, and hire your own coach. Football is not cheap. Volksmarching is. That a minority of students with the physique for it get so much money piled on their sport (which they do not keep up with later in life) is a waste of my dollars. I used tennis as an example because it is was, last time I look at the data, the sport middle class males were most likely to keep up with into their 50s. I think there is so much benefit to playing a team sport, even if it isn't a lifelong sport. I truly believe that kids today could use a little more toughness and physical strain. Football was so great for my middle schooler (now in high school and no longer playing football). He learned how to take direction, to push himself to the limit physically, and to encourage his fellow teammates. These are lifelong skills, even if he never picks up a football again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joker Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 And see this is the worry in Texas. In Texas we have NO regulations for homeschooling. To play football in Texas, you must pass your classes. I'm not sure if it is tied to the TAKS test or now the STARR/ EOC exams that start this year. So how would we demonstrate that? By just our transcript. I guarantee you that a lot of ps parents would withdraw their children so they could "homeschool" them. Tara, you say it would only be a small number. I have a feeling in Texas it would be a HUGE number and a HUGE problem. That of course would mean that homeschoolers would need the same kind of testing or accountability as ps... Which is why even though the Texas Homeschool Association tried to get the legislature to allow homeschoolers to participate in extra-curricular, the homeschoolers themselves defeated it.... I grew up in a sports family in TX and then it had nothing to do with TAKS. Every six weeks our report cards had to have all grades be a C or above or you were not allowed to play until next report card time and then only if grades were brought up. I think the problem in TX isn't grades, it's the UIL rules they have there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In The Great White North Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Let's compare the increased academic requirements for playing a sport in high school (of homeschoolers to deter failing ps students from claiming to be homeschooling) to the NCAA. Has anyone noticed an improvement in the academic prowess of intercollegiate athletes since the NCAA imposed its latest onerous set of rules? Back in the day, to play a fall sport in college all you had to do was show up and try out. Now you have to pay the NCAA, send them your SAT/ACT scores, send them a transcript, take high school courses approved by the NCAA (with such vague titles as "English 9") and have minimum grades and test scores. The result? College football players don't appear anymore academically inclined than they ever. did but high schools and colleges have a larger proliferation of what we used to call "underwater basket weaving" classes. All that bureaucracy for nothing. What makes anyone think additional academic requirements at the high school level will be any more effective? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiku Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Not all homeschooled athletes. Just those who wish to participate on public school teams that require public school students to meet academic standards. Nothing that isn't required of any other athlete on a High School team. Given the context of the conversation, I felt it was already understood which homeschooled athletes we were discussing. Tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktgrok Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 And see this is the worry in Texas. In Texas we have NO regulations for homeschooling. To play football in Texas, you must pass your classes. I'm not sure if it is tied to the TAKS test or now the STARR/ EOC exams that start this year. So how would we demonstrate that? By just our transcript. I guarantee you that a lot of ps parents would withdraw their children so they could "homeschool" them. Tara, you say it would only be a small number. I have a feeling in Texas it would be a HUGE number and a HUGE problem. That of course would mean that homeschoolers would need the same kind of testing or accountability as ps... Which is why even though the Texas Homeschool Association tried to get the legislature to allow homeschoolers to participate in extra-curricular, the homeschoolers themselves defeated it.... Well, the way it works here is that you have two different ways to homeschool. You can register with the county, which does involve some accountability (a portfolio reviewed by a certified teacher....It just has to show progress was made from start to finish of the year...no required subjects and unschooling is fine and allowed) and allows you to have access to sports/classes/etc at the public schools OR you can register with an umbrella school and from that point on are considered a private school student, and have no further contact with the county school board, no regulations, etc. So someone that WANTS to play sports or whatnot can submit to the (very easy) oversight of the county, and someone that doesn't doesn't have to. Works great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiku Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 I guarantee you that a lot of ps parents would withdraw their children so they could "homeschool" them. Again, I would say, "So what?" Parents have a right to homeschool. Having their children at home and not actively teaching them is not against the law. Plenty of unschoolers think it's fine to do nothing but eat junk food and play video games all day. While it's not what I would choose for my family, I'm not going to step on another family's toes when it comes to reasons to homeschool. If a family is not breaking the law, it's none of our business why they are homeschooling or how that is being accomplished. However, I stand by my original opinion that athletics and academics should not be entertwined. Rather than throwing the baby (homeschooled athletes) out with the bathwater over hypothetical potential abuses, I'd rather just see academic eligibility done away with. Tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In2why Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Again, I would say, "So what?" Parents have a right to homeschool. Having their children at home and not actively teaching them is not against the law. Plenty of unschoolers think it's fine to do nothing but eat junk food and play video games all day. While it's not what I would choose for my family, I'm not going to step on another family's toes when it comes to reasons to homeschool. If a family is not breaking the law, it's none of our business why they are homeschooling or how that is being accomplished. However, I stand by my original opinion that athletics and academics should not be entertwined. Rather than throwing the baby (homeschooled athletes) out with the bathwater over hypothetical potential abuses, I'd rather just see academic eligibility done away with. Tara The so what is because some of us live in States, where the very first time it happened, lawmakers would use a sledgehammer not only to stop that from happening, but also as an excuse for every other homeschooler in the state to have more regulations. Politics are rarely nuanced, and a lot of the time all it takes is the kind of publicity that a star athlete turned homeschooler caught cheating to change things for all of us. Of course the public schools already do it, of course most homeschoolers wouldn't, but the reality is that for some of us, homeschool laws and regulations are shifting sand beneath our feet. Wishing that sports were not tied to academics is an interesting debate, but while I agree with you, my state doesn't, so what I or you wish doesn't play into it. This is a very real issue here, and the time is now, open hearings are on the 30th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowbeltmom Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 This is a very real issue here, and the time is now, open hearings are on the 30th. Could you post a link to the proposed bill? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In2why Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Could you post a link to the proposed bill? I can't figure out how to link something on this Kindle. There isn't a copy or CTRL key. There are 3 bills in committee and if you are interested both Virginia Homeschoolers website and HEAV have the bills and links. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 This is a very real issue here, and the time is now, open hearings are on the 30th. It'll be interesting to see what happens. I'm not in VA, so I'm on the sidelines, but I'd be voting to allow it if I were involved. ;) I've enjoyed having the option here in PA - even if my boys are "only" on the Chess Team. I haven't seen any abuse, but of course, I'm only involved with one school district (and hear the scuttlebutt from a few neighboring ones). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowbeltmom Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 I can't figure out how to link something on this Kindle. There isn't a copy or CTRL key. There are 3 bills in committee and if you are interested both Virginia Homeschoolers website and HEAV have the bills and links. Thanks. I thought the discussion was about the state of VA, but I wasn't sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chepyl Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 If the rules are so loose that a parent can claim any grades they desire and that qualifies as academic eligibility then there will be abuse, as sports-mad parents of children who are in academic jeopardy at school will simply pull the kids out of school and claim eligibility even if no actual homeschooling takes place. Of course this will catch up kids (and society). That is the problem. These lack of requirements have a very bad potential for unintended negative consequences. So if there is a way to establish actual academic minimum standards for real home educated students it removes the abuse of status issues and open up opportunities I think home educated ought to have. I am in favor of home schooled children/teens having as much access to opportunities at public schools as possible. Bill While I'm perfectly ok with requiring substantiating of education similar to what my state (PA) has of all homeschoolers, I'll freely admit to seeing more abuse of the student athlete situation from ps students. There are many who are only in school to play - and tend to only show up to school on days they need to be there to play. While failure is supposed to stop them from playing, I pity the teacher who tries to fail a starting player. This doesn't apply to all athletes, of course, but I suspect the numbers are far greater in ps students than they ever would be from hs students who opt to play. My guys don't need to show anything special to be on the chess team, BUT I've been verbally told they've proved their academic snuff - most likely through basic conversation with their coaches. If they wanted to, they could check our annual portfolios I suppose, but I doubt it's ever gone that far. The abuse happens in college as well. I had a football team in my communications class group. It was a senior level class. We had all had comp, history, and humanities courses where we had written papers. Even my non-honors classes were graded harshly. My wrottong improved. The football player could not write a solid sentence or speak in public with decent grammar. He was nice, bit how did he pass three years of college classes and maintain eligibility? In high school and college, teachers/professors can be pressured to pass a star athlete "for the team." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.