Mary in VA Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 New argument against the Tebow Bill in VA in today's Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/if-you-suit-up-for-a-high-schools-team-you-should-sit-in-its-classroom-too/2012/02/08/gIQA3b30JR_story.html According to Preston Williams the homeschoolers shouldn't be allowed to play because public schooled "Johnny" is part of the "community" and the homeschooler isn't. It wouldn't be fair for "Johnny" to lose his place on the team to someone not a part of the community. I had thought the general public was becoming more knowledgeable and accepting of homeschooling. The comments would make me think maybe not. Mary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSNative Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Heaven forbid Johnny have to compete. That mean hs kid might elbow him off the team and hurt his self-esteem. Sheesh. I think it's interesting that this article seemed to only be about stirring the pot. Even the writer acknowledged that only a small group of kids would be affected. "According to Virginia Department of Education figures, there were 24,682 students in 2010-11, including 6,008 of high-school age, who would meet the bill’s definition of being home-schooled; there are 376,155 public high school students in Virginia this school year." I notice that the author also failed to note the amount that these hs families pay into the local school via their taxes. Surely as "school boosters" hs families are a part of the school Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Note that there is an opinion poll associated with the story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebecca VA Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 I see his point, though I still favor the Tebow Bill. He's not saying the homeschooler isn't part of the community. The homeschooler just isn't part of the fabric of the high school. He's a "drop-in" who only shows up for the one or two activities he wishes to participate in. The argument probably would have made more sense back in the olden days, when a high school really was the center of a community. Nowadays there are so many other outside-of-school opportunities (elite leagues, private lessons, community teams, and so on) that a person's high school identification is only part of who he is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSNative Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Some of the comments are interesting, too. I bolded the parts that I found particularly jarring. tkoho 6:43 AM EST "Homeschool families have opted out of the public school system. That is their choice. It is a hard job to educate your child at home to the standard of our public schools and harder still to exceed those standards. But once they've opted out of the school system they should not be allowed to pick and choose, ala carte, what services or privileges they want to continue receiving. Yes, those families still pay taxes, so the argument goes they should be entitled to take advantage of their local school’s services. But what if a family opted to send their child to private school rather than a homeschool? And suppose that child failed to make the varsity team at the private school, should he or she be allowed to compete on the public school team instead? Wouldn't that be the same thing? The family still pays taxes, just like the homeschool family, shouldn’t they be just as entitled to claim whatever services or perks of the system benefit their family? Extra curricular activities are a privilege, earned by carrying a certain GPA under a specific course load, and as the editorial alludes, they exist to support and enhance the academic community. This is a bad bill, seeking to let families have their cake and eat it too. It places undo burden on the school systems by requiring them to provide services to children they have not budgeted for, and it limits the opportunities for those existing students. You make the decision to home-school because you believe that's the best decision for your family, but you have to live with those decisions, good and bad. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSNative Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 I see his point, though I still favor the Tebow Bill. He's not saying the homeschooler isn't part of the community. The homeschooler just isn't part of the fabric of the high school. He's a "drop-in" who only shows up for the one or two activities he wishes to participate in. The argument probably would have made more sense back in the olden days, when a high school really was the center of a community. Nowadays there are so many other outside-of-school opportunities (elite leagues, private lessons, community teams, and so on) that a person's high school identification is only part of who he is. I have a solution to that. Let homeschool kids take some electives or pe in the school. My SIL lives in a state where she can take her kids to PE each day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KungFuPanda Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 WOW . . . the comments! They REALLY believe that all homeschoolers are religious extremists who turn their homes into mini Waco compounds. How do they NOT get that homeschoolers spend more time out in the community than the kids who are walled up in school all day? Methinks the author peaked in high school. It clearly defined his life disproportionately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[email protected] Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 A reminder: discuss the home schooling aspect of this and do not diverge into partisan politics. Moderator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 WOW . . . the comments! They REALLY believe that all homeschoolers are religious extremists who turn their homes into mini Waco compounds. How do they NOT get that homeschoolers spend more time out in the community than the kids who are walled up in school all day? Methinks the author peaked in high school. It clearly defined his life disproportionately. Because they are so tied up in their insular beliefs that they cannot accept that HSers simply want what is best for their children. I suspect that there is also an element of guilt. Many PSers that I know have admitted that they "would like to HS," they agree that HS children are generally better educated and better mannered but they can not invest the time (for a myriad of reasons, many perfectly valid) and they cover this guilt by making outlandish claims about the HS community. Were you to make similar claims about any other group (based on the actions of a tiny minority of said group) you would be accused of all manner of prejudicial behavior. Returning to the 1984 theme in another thread many of the anti-HS crowd seem to live under the banner "IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Some of the comments are interesting, too. I bolded the parts that I found particularly jarring. tkoho 6:43 AM EST "Homeschool families have opted out of the public school system. That is their choice. It is a hard job to educate your child at home to the standard of our public schools and harder still to exceed those standards. Hilarious. I mean...really. But once they've opted out of the school system they should not be allowed to pick and choose, ala carte, what services or privileges they want to continue receiving. Yes, those families still pay taxes, so the argument goes they should be entitled to take advantage of their local school’s services. But what if a family opted to send their child to private school rather than a homeschool? And suppose that child failed to make the varsity team at the private school, should he or she be allowed to compete on the public school team instead? Wouldn't that be the same thing? The family still pays taxes, just like the homeschool family, shouldn’t they be just as entitled to claim whatever services or perks of the system benefit their family? Extra curricular activities are a privilege, earned by carrying a certain GPA under a specific course load, and as the editorial alludes, they exist to support and enhance the academic community. This is a bad bill, seeking to let families have their cake and eat it too. It places undo burden on the school systems by requiring them to provide services to children they have not budgeted for, and it limits the opportunities for those existing students. You make the decision to home-school because you believe that's the best decision for your family, but you have to live with those decisions, good and bad. " So, enroll them as part-time students and let the school get extra money. I think kids should be allowed to participate in extra-curricular activities because we *do* pay taxes too. I think testing could easily make up for lack of GPA. There are many districts where private school students are allowedto participate in sports not offered at their school. The author of the comment in question is truly ignorant of homeschoolers and how many schools handle these situations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ma23peas Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Some of the comments are interesting, too. I bolded the parts that I found particularly jarring. tkoho 6:43 AM EST "Homeschool families have opted out of the public school system. That is their choice. It is a hard job to educate your child at home to the standard of our public schools and harder still to exceed those standards. But once they've opted out of the school system they should not be allowed to pick and choose, ala carte, what services or privileges they want to continue receiving. Yes, those families still pay taxes, so the argument goes they should be entitled to take advantage of their local school’s services. But what if a family opted to send their child to private school rather than a homeschool? And suppose that child failed to make the varsity team at the private school, should he or she be allowed to compete on the public school team instead? Wouldn't that be the same thing? The family still pays taxes, just like the homeschool family, shouldn’t they be just as entitled to claim whatever services or perks of the system benefit their family? Extra curricular activities are a privilege, earned by carrying a certain GPA under a specific course load, and as the editorial alludes, they exist to support and enhance the academic community. This is a bad bill, seeking to let families have their cake and eat it too. It places undo burden on the school systems by requiring them to provide services to children they have not budgeted for, and it limits the opportunities for those existing students. You make the decision to home-school because you believe that's the best decision for your family, but you have to live with those decisions, good and bad. " Before Tim Tebow played on his team, no scholarships had been offered (for football)...the booster support was fledgling, after TT, over a dozen received scholarships and the football program exploded deeply offsetting any losses in revenue...these are just red herrings whining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSNative Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Hilarious. I mean...really. So, enroll them as part-time students and let the school get extra money. I think kids should be allowed to participate in extra-curricular activities because we *do* pay taxes too. I think testing could easily make up for lack of GPA. There are many districts where private school students are allowedto participate in sports not offered at their school. The author of the comment in question is truly ignorant of homeschoolers and how many schools handle these situations. :iagree: Exactly! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impish Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Am I the only one that finds this kinda sad? children whose lives are defined by their school and school activities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary in VA Posted February 19, 2012 Author Share Posted February 19, 2012 Am I the only one that finds this kinda sad? children whose lives are defined by their school and school activities. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Am I the only one that finds this kinda sad? children whose lives are defined by their school and school activities. You are not the only one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyhomemaker25 Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 I laughed so hard when I read the comment about it being hard to educate your child to the standards of public school and harder still to exceed those standards. I had to run right out and share that with my husband. Great laugh for the morning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris in VA Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Am I the only one that finds this kinda sad? children whose lives are defined by their school and school activities. Maybe sad, but understandable. Two things--the amount of time kids spend there, and the way the schools try to do so many things at once. Time-wise--my kid spends from 8:30 until 3:05, approx, with early Mondays. She spends the early am getting ready to go, and the rest of the afternoon or part of the evening on homework. Then there's various community-building night activites, too. No wonder kids define themselves by school. It's where they meet a ton of people, some friends, some not. It's who gives them most of their feedback--peers and teachers. It runs their lives, determines their schedules, feeds them, entertains them, and oh yeah, educates them...:glare: I'm not sure how I feel about it, but I can understand it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renmew Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 I am not a true homeschooler by any means, but honestly I can see the public school side of the story. Sports in high school are mostly about the group. You win for the school. You cheer for the school. Most people don't scream, "Go, Jimmy." They shout, "Go falcons!" It just seems odd to have someone come on the field just for the team and not participate in any more of the community. There are club sports and open community programs, so it's not like high schools have the only teams in town. Also, a small point, at least in California, is that just because a family is paying property taxes doesn't mean the school is receiving any benefit from that. Schools are funded by daily attendance, not by the amount of property taxes collected within their boundaries. Sorry, just my POV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Also, a small point, at least in California, is that just because a family is paying property taxes doesn't mean the school is receiving any benefit from that. Schools are funded by daily attendance, not by the amount of property taxes collected within their boundaries. Sorry, just my POV. Are you certain about that? It is my understanding that schools are funded by property and other taxes, hence the fact that some school districts in wealthy areas have more funding than districts in poorer areas. Further I suspect that schools may find a way to count participation in sports as attendance and thus actually come out ahead if the count is, as you declare, solely on numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renmew Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Are you certain about that? It is my understanding that schools are funded by property and other taxes, hence the fact that some school districts in wealthy areas have more funding than districts in poorer areas. Further I suspect that schools may find a way to count participation in sports as attendance and thus actually come out ahead if the count is, as you declare, solely on numbers. Quite the opposite, in fact. A school in an affluent area is initially given the same funding per student (daily attendance) as a school in a very poor urban setting. Then, the poorer school receives additional money in the form of Title 1 funds and other such programs for struggling students. Anything fancy an affluent school has has been donated from parents in the form of fund raisers and PTO type stuff. A couple towns over is La Canada, which is full of news anchors, sports players, and movie stars. For two years in a row, they have "required" each family with kids in their public schools to pay $2000. This kind of school is hardest hit by reductions in state funding, because it has far fewer alternative funding programs coming in. Another nearby school ONLY has a librarian and computer lab (staffed) because the parents fund it year after year through donations and fundraising. Schools in the same district, but 10 minutes away and in poorer neighborhoods receive Title moneys and other funding that make a librarian and computer lab staff member a school paid position. Maybe it is different in other states, but this is how it is in California. Also, daily attendance is determined by the number of bottoms in their desks at the very beginning of the school day. That us why schools freak out over tardies and absences, because it directly takes money from their budgets. I did my student teaching at a large charter school in an impoverished neighborhood. Every morning there was a line of students at the office door, often in their pajamas, signing in for attendance purposes. Then they were sent home sick. The school used this method as a loop hole in order to maximize their funding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Maybe it is different in other states, but this is how it is in California. Also, daily attendance is determined by the number of bottoms in their desks at the very beginning of the school day. That us why schools freak out over tardies and absences, because it directly takes money from their budgets. I did my student teaching at a large charter school in an impoverished neighborhood. Every morning there was a line of students at the office door, often in their pajamas, signing in for attendance purposes. Then they were sent home sick. The school used this method as a loop hole in order to maximize their funding. Interesting, I learn something new every day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenaj Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 I am not a true homeschooler by any means, but honestly I can see the public school side of the story. Sports in high school are mostly about the group. You win for the school. You cheer for the school. Most people don't scream, "Go, Jimmy." They shout, "Go falcons!" It just seems odd to have someone come on the field just for the team and not participate in any more of the community. There are club sports and open community programs, so it's not like high schools have the only teams in town. Also, a small point, at least in California, is that just because a family is paying property taxes doesn't mean the school is receiving any benefit from that. Schools are funded by daily attendance, not by the amount of property taxes collected within their boundaries. Sorry, just my POV. There are areas of the country (like mine) where most community sports disappear at the Jr. High age because all the team sports move to the school. My very, sports-orientated oldest son missed out on about 3 years of team sports because in our state it is up to individual school districts whether to allow homeschoolers to participate. We gave him the option to go to school but he didn't want to go in that direction. Fortunately, his sophmore year we found out about a small private school that welcomed homeschoolers. It's been a great fit for him. You commented about the strangeness of "just" being at the school for sports. We've had no problem with that - our kids are there everyday for practices and are absolutely part of the community of that school. The kids end up participating in many friendships that extend the activity. If our ps had been open to homeschoolers, I'm guessing the same atmosphere would exist - my kids had already played with the ps students on many community and local teams up to jr. high and still have many friends that participate. To extend their participation onto the school teams wouldn't have been a great adjustment :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G5052 Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 New argument against the Tebow Bill in VA in today's Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/if-you-suit-up-for-a-high-schools-team-you-should-sit-in-its-classroom-too/2012/02/08/gIQA3b30JR_story.html According to Preston Williams the homeschoolers shouldn't be allowed to play because public schooled "Johnny" is part of the "community" and the homeschooler isn't. It wouldn't be fair for "Johnny" to lose his place on the team to someone not a part of the community. I had thought the general public was becoming more knowledgeable and accepting of homeschooling. The comments would make me think maybe not. Mary The local PTO's have been sending out heavy-duty emails about how bad this bill is for the local schools. Sports are a very emotional issue, and I'm not surprised that it is bringing out emotions that are normally in check. The ugliness of the PTO emails is shocking, but not unexpected. We're still very misunderstood and resented IMHO. Most public school folk don't know the Virginia already has a policy of allowing part-time public school enrollment for homeschoolers. Specifics are up to the local schools, but this law is designed to take an existing policy and extend it to sports. Some of the rhetoric I've read seems to imply that we aren't allowed any access and that it should be kept that way, which is incorrect. If my kid is taking Spanish at the high school, why can't she join volleyball? We'll see if it passes. My guess is that it won't this time, although the fact that it is on the table is encouraging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom0012 Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 (edited) I do favor the Tebow bill and would like my children to have the opportunity to participate in school sports, if possible. Part of me does understand the other side of the argument, though. In our County, there is major overcrowding in the high schools because there has been a lot of growth in our area. That means that kids that are in school have fewer opportunities to participate in sports already. I feel as though my children have advantages that the kids who are in school all day do not. So, a part of me thinks that if these kids are going to sit through the classes for 7 hours a day and then have hours of homework at night, maybe they should have priority over my child in participating in the extracurricular activities. I'm not saying my kids don't work hard, but they do have have opportunities that PS students do not. For one, they have had the opportunity to truly have a childhood. They have free time to explore their interests and to spend with their friends. Most of the kids I know who are in PS have very limited time outside of school and extracurricular activities. Now, if I had a superstar athlete, I can see where I would feel very strongly about the bill because it might be the difference between whether or not I would be able to continue to homeschool that child. Lisa Edited February 19, 2012 by LisaTheresa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebastian (a lady) Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 New argument against the Tebow Bill in VA in today's Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/if-you-suit-up-for-a-high-schools-team-you-should-sit-in-its-classroom-too/2012/02/08/gIQA3b30JR_story.html According to Preston Williams the homeschoolers shouldn't be allowed to play because public schooled "Johnny" is part of the "community" and the homeschooler isn't. It wouldn't be fair for "Johnny" to lose his place on the team to someone not a part of the community. I had thought the general public was becoming more knowledgeable and accepting of homeschooling. The comments would make me think maybe not. Mary The comments remind me why I always swear not to read the comments sections of news sites. Anonymity makes for spiteful commenting. A couple facts about VA: Students can already request partial enrollment in their local school on a space available basis. So it would be possible to be in a math class or language class, etc. Students who don't spend their full day in the school building (such as those spending part of the day at the community college for dual enrollment) can still participate in school sports. Vaccinations are a non issue. My sons did a summer language camps that was organized by the local school district (although only one week of camp was actually taught by a district teacher; the other week was taught by a contractor). I had to provide proof of vaccination in order to register them. And the bill in question specifies that parental consent and physical examinations would still be applicable. The VA homeschooler sports access bill would only allow homeschoolers to try out at their local high school - not shop around. What's more (per my understanding), the bill does not require the schools to permit homeschoolers access. What it does is not allow the interscholastic group (such as the Virginia High School League to set rules that would not permit homeschoolers to play. The bill states that a VA public school will not join an organization that will not permit homechoolers to participate. Statements from the bill's sponsor, Rob Bell, indicated that he expects that individual school districts will still retain eligibility discression. I think this would also open up organizations that govern activities like science fairs, debate, foreign language clubs, etc. I find that much of the objection to homeschooler access is based on presumptions that aren't factual. I'm not sure if the comments section is still open on the opinion piece. I keep getting an error when I try to reply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebastian (a lady) Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 (edited) One other tidbit. I was having a discussion with my son's swim coach a couple weeks ago about high school level swimming. Evidently, the local high school swim teams generally ask swimmers who are also members of club teams to swim most of the practices with the club, in order to free up pool space for the high school team members who aren't year round swimmers. He said his high schoolers tend to swim Monday with the school team and compete with the school team, but do all their other practices with the club. So in this sport at least, our hypothetical public school Johnny would be practicing with non-school mates for most of the week. In fact, he might well be lane mates most of the year with swimmers he is racing against once he puts on his high school team swimsuit and cap. Conversely, members of the same high school team might be training with any number of local club teams. So the consistency of the team spirit argument does have some problems in practical application. The current policy also seems to prevent homeschoolers from joining something like a crew team, that is affiliated with a public school, but totally funded through private efforts (member dues and fund raising). So the argument about funding is also weak. Edited February 19, 2012 by Sebastian (a lady) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmilyK Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 This doesn't relate to the underlying controversy, but here --local property taxes are not linked to the school; funding is largely the same across the state --private school kids can do sports at the public schools. (relating to the comment to the article) So it isn't the same funding situation across the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChristineW Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Quite the opposite, in fact. A school in an affluent area is initially given the same funding per student (daily attendance) as a school in a very poor urban setting. Then, the poorer school receives additional money in the form of Title 1 funds and other such programs for struggling students. Anything fancy an affluent school has has been donated from parents in the form of fund raisers and PTO type stuff. A couple towns over is La Canada, which is full of news anchors, sports players, and movie stars. For two years in a row, they have "required" each family with kids in their public schools to pay $2000. This kind of school is hardest hit by reductions in state funding, because it has far fewer alternative funding programs coming in. Another nearby school ONLY has a librarian and computer lab (staffed) because the parents fund it year after year through donations and fundraising. Schools in the same district, but 10 minutes away and in poorer neighborhoods receive Title moneys and other funding that make a librarian and computer lab staff member a school paid position. Maybe it is different in other states, but this is how it is in California. Also, daily attendance is determined by the number of bottoms in their desks at the very beginning of the school day. That us why schools freak out over tardies and absences, because it directly takes money from their budgets. I did my student teaching at a large charter school in an impoverished neighborhood. Every morning there was a line of students at the office door, often in their pajamas, signing in for attendance purposes. Then they were sent home sick. The school used this method as a loop hole in order to maximize their funding. Yep--except for about 10% of the districts (ie Beverly Hills and smaller districts in Marin). And it is why a Tebow bill is unlikely to ever pass in CA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 WE have no problems I've heard of with hs kids playing on teams in ps around us in PA. The coach of our Chess Team stopped by my room (in ps) last week thanking me for having my boys on the team. They hadn't won districts in over 20 years. They'd never won states. Last year they won both. This year they won districts and head to states next month. Because my boys are Boards 1 and 3 (and were 1, 3, and 5 two years ago) they do cut ps kids from the competitive part of the team. The team prefers to win... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 Am I the only one that finds this kinda sad? children whose lives are defined by their school and school activities. I have a feeling that you are not the only one. Yes, it is fun to be part of something or to be a fan of your school's team. To define your life by it...that is where sad starts. I was discussing this with my parents the other night (who I should add are total supporters of our homeschooling efforts and homeschooling in general) and my mom said she understood where the reporter was coming from in his story of Johnny growing up wanting to be part of the team when his turn came. Then my dad said...how is the homeschooled kid showing up at tryouts any different than the new kid who moved to town over the summer showing up? Should Johnny get extra points for having lived his life in the district? Mom decided that perhaps the author's story fell apart under closer scrutiny. Yup-fails the common sense test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mom2scouts Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 I am not a true homeschooler by any means, but honestly I can see the public school side of the story. Sports in high school are mostly about the group. You win for the school. You cheer for the school. Most people don't scream, "Go, Jimmy." They shout, "Go falcons!" It just seems odd to have someone come on the field just for the team and not participate in any more of the community. There are club sports and open community programs, so it's not like high schools have the only teams in town. Also, a small point, at least in California, is that just because a family is paying property taxes doesn't mean the school is receiving any benefit from that. Schools are funded by daily attendance, not by the amount of property taxes collected within their boundaries. Sorry, just my POV. Neither of your last statements are true in my area. Ninety percent of my property taxes go to fund our local schools. We get a breakdown on our property tax bill. The schools also receive money from the state and that is based on daily attendance, but the majority of school funding is local. Club and community sports are almost non-existent in my area for students past elementary age. Most recreation departments, Y's and clubs assume that kids who want to continue in sports will play for their school teams, so high schools DO have the only teams in town. Even athletes who only want to play on a recreational team have a hard time finding that past sixth grade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZooRho Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Okay I know I'm bumping this thread, but I had not paid close attention to the exact wording of the bill. It really just bans the school systems from joining VHSL. It really will be up to each system to allow the child to play. SO is anyone in a group that is also working on their local system to allow hsers to play? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texascamps Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Our PS schools here allow the homeschoolers to participate in all team sports and band. We have to pay the same fee as anyone else on the team. I haven't heard any complaints. My daughter is treated the same as anyone else. The hardest part is driving her there for practice when all of the other kids are already there. I should point out that our schools in my little town are excellent and child centric. I just can't see the argument against having homeschoolers participate. They should have to try out like everyone else but if they make it... what's the problem? I'll try to think this through more to understand. 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.