One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs selling widgets trash teachers, who are often some of the most selfless, devoted people you'll ever meet.
Home-schoolers compete in public school sports and activities
12,115 Views |
178 Replies |
Last: 4 yr ago by Osodecentx
That would be my m-i-l.bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs selling widgets trash teachers, who are often some of the most selfless, devoted people you'll ever meet.
The problem wasnt her or other teachers like her.
It was parents who didnt talk to their kids (some because they had 2 or 3 jobs) or took the kid to bars at night so he fell asleep in class or sent the kid to kindergarten still in diapers...
From the sound of it, this happened awhile ago... "none of them could get into Baylor" implies that they are all beyond high school age.J.B.Katz said:My m-in-law taught elementary school for 25 years. She's a quiet, conservative woman, and she was as disgusted as I've ever seen her about this situation.ShooterTX said:I'm more than willing to say that there are at least a few stories like this out there. I know firsthand that the quiverfull thing was real, right up until the mid 2000s (thanks Duggars and TLC). I can also tell you firsthand that it was never more than a single digit percentage of the homeschoolers across the nation... but they were very outspoken and got a ton of media attention.Mothra said:I always love these fictional, over-the-top in their stereotypes, anecdotes. They are as humorous as they are unbelievable. Thanks for the laugh, jinx.J.B.Katz said:
Wife's cousin, who has a master's from Baylor, and her husband, not a college grad and a guy who couldn't hold a sales job because of his nutty religious views, homeschooled their 5 kids. They only stopped having kids because Hubs wasn't bringing in any money with his Guitars for Worship ministry.
The family lost their house in Ft Worth. There was a period when people from their church were letting them housesit while they were out of the country so they'd have a place to live. Wife finally went back to work over husband's objections because, with a Baylor degree, she could get a job and put food on the table and a roof over their heads.
None of the kids went to college. One went on some kind of Quiverfull mission trip and married at 18 into a quiverfull family in east jesus, Nebraska. Hubs didnt care about a college education for his kids because he didnt have one. Notice he didnt have a job that would support his family for most of his career either.
He also thought God would provide. God did. Wife got a job.
Her late uncle was a hard-core Baptist but even he started to question the wisdom of an educational curriculum that didn't prepare the kids for college or the job market and made marriage at 18 a better fate than staying at home for a hand to mouth existence.
Within that movement, there was a tiny fraction would could fit this story. The majority of the quiverfull folks, actually took education very seriously and produced some very well educated graduates.
You really have to look at the percentages and outcomes.
If this story represents the most common "horror story" of homeschooling... how does that match up to the most common "horror story" of public school? Are you really willing to compare kids with a lack-luster education who get married at a young age to kids with zero education, a criminal record, multiple kids with multiple partners, etc??
If you were forced to choose between all of the greatness and worst of homeschooling vs all the greatness and worst of public schooling... could you honestly say that you would choose public schooling?
what percentage of people on death row were homeschooled? what percentage went to public school? what percentage are the dreaded "quiverfull" group?
Of course, homeschool isn't perfect, but the story you relay isn't even representative of a full 1% of current homeschoolers. And how many of the kids in your story went on to a life of crime... and this is probably the worst homeschooling story that you encountered?
The kids could read, write and do math, but the science curriculum was creationist and when our kids were reading Harry Potter she was warned by her niece that those books 'celebrated witchcraft."
None of those kids could score well enough on a college prep exam to get into Baylor. Which was where there mother went.
Since they are presumably all adults now... can you inform us how many of them are criminals? how many of them have a job? how many of them have illegit kids? how many of them are on welfare? how many homeless? how many are drug addicts?
I would really like to hear the results of this tragedy, beyond that they couldn't get into Baylor. There are millions of people who never go to Baylor... as sad as that is, it isn't the same as getting into the federal pen.
ShooterTX
You are such a bizarre person.J.B.Katz said:
It was parents who didnt talk to their kids (some because they had 2 or 3 jobs)
Might behoove you to work 2 or 3 jobs for a while.
As already pointed out, taxes aren't paid for use. They're paid for the long-term betterment of your locality/state/country. If you don't want to pay taxes for things you'll never use, go be an Alaskan bush person.Forest Bueller_bf said:But you should still have to pay $2000 to $10,000 taxes a year to support the local public school. Right?bear2be2 said:I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.LIB,MR BEARS said:When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.Osodecentx said:
I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?
This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.
If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.
I'm pretty ambivalent here. My brother is retiring as a Jr. High Athletic Coordinator this year, he doesn't care really. Most legit Home School kids are good kids. Most are not all that athletic compared to a 5A/6A school athlete.
My child won the shot put at his TAAPS 4A district area meet a couple years back, I made sure to let him know he would have been 7th in the Arlington middle school district meet. Which is pretty good out of the 30 that competed.
That said, most Home School or small private school kids are not competitive with a top 6A school athlete or shoot even a top 3A athlete, a real home school kid would usually just be along for the ride and not make any real contribution to an average suburban Public school team.
And it's not the real home school athletes that will make this a problematic bill. It's the extreme potential for abuse that will further unlevel the playing field.
bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs...
at this point I thought you were going to engage in some teacher bashing.
I was so relieved that it quickly shifted into teacher-sainthood and public school worship... that was a close one!
ShooterTX
Might want to through some race into this for extra pop.J.B.Katz said:My m-in-law taught elementary school for 25 years. She's a quiet, conservative woman, and she was as disgusted as I've ever seen her about this situation.ShooterTX said:I'm more than willing to say that there are at least a few stories like this out there. I know firsthand that the quiverfull thing was real, right up until the mid 2000s (thanks Duggars and TLC). I can also tell you firsthand that it was never more than a single digit percentage of the homeschoolers across the nation... but they were very outspoken and got a ton of media attention.Mothra said:I always love these fictional, over-the-top in their stereotypes, anecdotes. They are as humorous as they are unbelievable. Thanks for the laugh, jinx.J.B.Katz said:
Wife's cousin, who has a master's from Baylor, and her husband, not a college grad and a guy who couldn't hold a sales job because of his nutty religious views, homeschooled their 5 kids. They only stopped having kids because Hubs wasn't bringing in any money with his Guitars for Worship ministry.
The family lost their house in Ft Worth. There was a period when people from their church were letting them housesit while they were out of the country so they'd have a place to live. Wife finally went back to work over husband's objections because, with a Baylor degree, she could get a job and put food on the table and a roof over their heads.
None of the kids went to college. One went on some kind of Quiverfull mission trip and married at 18 into a quiverfull family in east jesus, Nebraska. Hubs didnt care about a college education for his kids because he didnt have one. Notice he didnt have a job that would support his family for most of his career either.
He also thought God would provide. God did. Wife got a job.
Her late uncle was a hard-core Baptist but even he started to question the wisdom of an educational curriculum that didn't prepare the kids for college or the job market and made marriage at 18 a better fate than staying at home for a hand to mouth existence.
Within that movement, there was a tiny fraction would could fit this story. The majority of the quiverfull folks, actually took education very seriously and produced some very well educated graduates.
You really have to look at the percentages and outcomes.
If this story represents the most common "horror story" of homeschooling... how does that match up to the most common "horror story" of public school? Are you really willing to compare kids with a lack-luster education who get married at a young age to kids with zero education, a criminal record, multiple kids with multiple partners, etc??
If you were forced to choose between all of the greatness and worst of homeschooling vs all the greatness and worst of public schooling... could you honestly say that you would choose public schooling?
what percentage of people on death row were homeschooled? what percentage went to public school? what percentage are the dreaded "quiverfull" group?
Of course, homeschool isn't perfect, but the story you relay isn't even representative of a full 1% of current homeschoolers. And how many of the kids in your story went on to a life of crime... and this is probably the worst homeschooling story that you encountered?
The kids could read, write and do math, but the science curriculum was creationist and when our kids were reading Harry Potter she was warned by her niece that those books 'celebrated witchcraft."
None of those kids could score well enough on a college prep exam to get into Baylor. Which was where there mother went.
And here's one now.ShooterTX said:bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs...
at this point I thought you were going to engage in some teacher bashing.
I was so relieved that it quickly shifted into teacher-sainthood and public school worship... that was a close one!
So teachers have meaningless jobs now? I could see how someone who ignorantly believes every day at a public school is an episode of Law and Order might think that.
Your post seems to suggest there is a problem with the scenario you described. Since a parents' tax dollars are paying for the schooling, I would have no problem whatsoever with that scenario.Booray said:No one is saying that they can't participate in sports. The objectors are saying you can't participate in sports without full time enrollment. Its a parent choice to forego both the benefits and the detriments of public school.Mothra said:So a parent whose taxes go to pay for the public school system shouldn't be able to partake in the the benefits of what their tax dollars support? That doesn't make sense.bear2be2 said:I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.LIB,MR BEARS said:When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.Osodecentx said:
I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?
This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.
If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.
There have been laws on the books for years that special needs children who don't attend public school are allowed the benefit of special needs programs. Why shouldn't the same rule apply to sports?
Next-I'll take math class but not English? Or-I am not really interested in your rules around lunch time campus access so my kid won't obey them? I disagree with the whole evolution conversation so he will be sitting out the next three weeks?
Again, property taxes are not a user fee. You don't have to pay property taxes to use the schools; not having children does not exempt you.
You're assuming that this actually happened, of course, when chances are it has been embellished greatly or didn't happen at all.ShooterTX said:From the sound of it, this happened awhile ago... "none of them could get into Baylor" implies that they are all beyond high school age.J.B.Katz said:My m-in-law taught elementary school for 25 years. She's a quiet, conservative woman, and she was as disgusted as I've ever seen her about this situation.ShooterTX said:I'm more than willing to say that there are at least a few stories like this out there. I know firsthand that the quiverfull thing was real, right up until the mid 2000s (thanks Duggars and TLC). I can also tell you firsthand that it was never more than a single digit percentage of the homeschoolers across the nation... but they were very outspoken and got a ton of media attention.Mothra said:I always love these fictional, over-the-top in their stereotypes, anecdotes. They are as humorous as they are unbelievable. Thanks for the laugh, jinx.J.B.Katz said:
Wife's cousin, who has a master's from Baylor, and her husband, not a college grad and a guy who couldn't hold a sales job because of his nutty religious views, homeschooled their 5 kids. They only stopped having kids because Hubs wasn't bringing in any money with his Guitars for Worship ministry.
The family lost their house in Ft Worth. There was a period when people from their church were letting them housesit while they were out of the country so they'd have a place to live. Wife finally went back to work over husband's objections because, with a Baylor degree, she could get a job and put food on the table and a roof over their heads.
None of the kids went to college. One went on some kind of Quiverfull mission trip and married at 18 into a quiverfull family in east jesus, Nebraska. Hubs didnt care about a college education for his kids because he didnt have one. Notice he didnt have a job that would support his family for most of his career either.
He also thought God would provide. God did. Wife got a job.
Her late uncle was a hard-core Baptist but even he started to question the wisdom of an educational curriculum that didn't prepare the kids for college or the job market and made marriage at 18 a better fate than staying at home for a hand to mouth existence.
Within that movement, there was a tiny fraction would could fit this story. The majority of the quiverfull folks, actually took education very seriously and produced some very well educated graduates.
You really have to look at the percentages and outcomes.
If this story represents the most common "horror story" of homeschooling... how does that match up to the most common "horror story" of public school? Are you really willing to compare kids with a lack-luster education who get married at a young age to kids with zero education, a criminal record, multiple kids with multiple partners, etc??
If you were forced to choose between all of the greatness and worst of homeschooling vs all the greatness and worst of public schooling... could you honestly say that you would choose public schooling?
what percentage of people on death row were homeschooled? what percentage went to public school? what percentage are the dreaded "quiverfull" group?
Of course, homeschool isn't perfect, but the story you relay isn't even representative of a full 1% of current homeschoolers. And how many of the kids in your story went on to a life of crime... and this is probably the worst homeschooling story that you encountered?
The kids could read, write and do math, but the science curriculum was creationist and when our kids were reading Harry Potter she was warned by her niece that those books 'celebrated witchcraft."
None of those kids could score well enough on a college prep exam to get into Baylor. Which was where there mother went.
Since they are presumably all adults now... can you inform us how many of them are criminals? how many of them have a job? how many of them have illegit kids? how many of them are on welfare? how many homeless? how many are drug addicts?
I would really like to hear the results of this tragedy, beyond that they couldn't get into Baylor. There are millions of people who never go to Baylor... as sad as that is, it isn't the same as getting into the federal pen.
I thought you called the slippery slope argument a fallacy. And now you're making one. What gives?bear2be2 said:As already pointed out, taxes aren't paid for use. They're paid for the long-term betterment of your locality/state/country. If you don't want to pay taxes for things you'll never use, go be an Alaskan bush person.Forest Bueller_bf said:But you should still have to pay $2000 to $10,000 taxes a year to support the local public school. Right?bear2be2 said:I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.LIB,MR BEARS said:When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.Osodecentx said:
I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?
This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.
If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.
I'm pretty ambivalent here. My brother is retiring as a Jr. High Athletic Coordinator this year, he doesn't care really. Most legit Home School kids are good kids. Most are not all that athletic compared to a 5A/6A school athlete.
My child won the shot put at his TAAPS 4A district area meet a couple years back, I made sure to let him know he would have been 7th in the Arlington middle school district meet. Which is pretty good out of the 30 that competed.
That said, most Home School or small private school kids are not competitive with a top 6A school athlete or shoot even a top 3A athlete, a real home school kid would usually just be along for the ride and not make any real contribution to an average suburban Public school team.
And it's not the real home school athletes that will make this a problematic bill. It's the extreme potential for abuse that will further unlevel the playing field.
The idea that home-schooled kids couldn't previously play sports is a specious one. Just about every decent-sized town or city already has home-school co-op teams that compete in non-league games against UIL schools and compete in their own organization with other collectives like them.Oldbear83 said:
I think each end has problems. People who homeschool their kids should not lose the privilege of playing school sports, not least because as an old official the 'only shows up for practice and game day' thing was pretty common at a lot of urban schools. But I also think it's wise to put some limits on just where a home-schooled kid gets to play, and how he/she is determined to be eligible.
For home-school kids who want to play at a public school sports, the rule should be they are assigned to the public school geographically closest to where they live. Those kids would need to pass the same physical exam and have the same vaccinations as athletes at the school. The kid would have to provide proof of passing a proctored exam showing academic proficiency at the declared grade level, or pass a two hour survey-type exam at the school to demonstrate that proficiency.
And no home-schooled kid gets to automatically make the team or be guaranteed playing time. Just like anyone else, you earn your spot.
There's THESA, the Abilene Hawks, the Lubbock Titans, the Midessa Warriors, etc., etc.
These opportunities already exist for actual home-school kids. The problem with this bill is it's likely to create a new class of "home-school kids" who are inevitably going to create new and unnecessary problems for the public school athletics model.
You obviously have never run a school. Giving everyone those options would be a nightmare.Mothra said:Your post seems to suggest there is a problem with the scenario you described. Since a parents' tax dollars are paying for the schooling, I would have no problem whatsoever with that scenario.Booray said:No one is saying that they can't participate in sports. The objectors are saying you can't participate in sports without full time enrollment. Its a parent choice to forego both the benefits and the detriments of public school.Mothra said:So a parent whose taxes go to pay for the public school system shouldn't be able to partake in the the benefits of what their tax dollars support? That doesn't make sense.bear2be2 said:I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.LIB,MR BEARS said:When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.Osodecentx said:
I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?
This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.
If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.
There have been laws on the books for years that special needs children who don't attend public school are allowed the benefit of special needs programs. Why shouldn't the same rule apply to sports?
Next-I'll take math class but not English? Or-I am not really interested in your rules around lunch time campus access so my kid won't obey them? I disagree with the whole evolution conversation so he will be sitting out the next three weeks?
Again, property taxes are not a user fee. You don't have to pay property taxes to use the schools; not having children does not exempt you.
And you keep saying that parents' tax dollars are paying for the schooling without addressing the user fee point. Do apartment dwellers or people with huge ag exemptions not get the benefit that other home schoolers do?
I went through the pre-AP/AP program at what most here would consider a poor public school. I left well prepared for my time at Baylor and post-graduation life as an adult.Robert Wilson said:
Good post. I agree with that. From our experience, most private schools (even ones that are considered strong) aren't better than good AP programs at good public schools. They just make kids do a lot more work. Then you've got to sort through what you prefer re: the social aspects of one versus the other. That's obviously very personal. The super heavy hitter private schools are outliers, but that's largely based on selection (inputs have a lot to do with outputs) and funding which has to do with who you can hire as teachers. I would still have other reservations about those places right now, but that's all for another thread.
Good point re: some star athletes or other high extracurricular performers pulling out of school to be homeschooled. I hadn't thought about that possibility. I would not expect to see much of that because I think that could blow up their college recruiting (much different than a kid who is getting rigorous homeschool then decides to go use the local school for extracurriculars), but would be interesting to see it play out.
Granted, the education I received wasn't the same one my on-level peers experienced, and I can see how that would be an issue. But almost all of the kids I went to school with who valued their education -- or had parents who did -- left high school prepared to be successful in college and lead productive lives in whatever career field they chose.
Then have stipulations only real home school athletes qualify for the exemptions, not people trying to game the system. Of the home school people I know, none of their kids would make a dent at a large public school athletically. This bill shouldn't be that big a deal.bear2be2 said:As already pointed out, taxes aren't paid for use. They're paid for the long-term betterment of your locality/state/country. If you don't want to pay taxes for things you'll never use, go be an Alaskan bush person.Forest Bueller_bf said:But you should still have to pay $2000 to $10,000 taxes a year to support the local public school. Right?bear2be2 said:I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.LIB,MR BEARS said:When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.Osodecentx said:
I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?
This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.
If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.
I'm pretty ambivalent here. My brother is retiring as a Jr. High Athletic Coordinator this year, he doesn't care really. Most legit Home School kids are good kids. Most are not all that athletic compared to a 5A/6A school athlete.
My child won the shot put at his TAAPS 4A district area meet a couple years back, I made sure to let him know he would have been 7th in the Arlington middle school district meet. Which is pretty good out of the 30 that competed.
That said, most Home School or small private school kids are not competitive with a top 6A school athlete or shoot even a top 3A athlete, a real home school kid would usually just be along for the ride and not make any real contribution to an average suburban Public school team.
And it's not the real home school athletes that will make this a problematic bill. It's the extreme potential for abuse that will further unlevel the playing field.
Jinx your anecdotal stories are always the best. Every conceivable story, for every conceivable situation, very good stuff.
It's not that easy, unfortunately. The UIL already has a bunch of rules on fair play regarding transfers and such. Enforcing the rules is always more difficult than writing them.Forest Bueller_bf said:Then have stipulations only real home school athletes qualify for the exemptions, not people trying to game the system. Of the home school people I know, none of their kids would make a dent at a large public school athletically. This bill shouldn't be that big a deal.bear2be2 said:As already pointed out, taxes aren't paid for use. They're paid for the long-term betterment of your locality/state/country. If you don't want to pay taxes for things you'll never use, go be an Alaskan bush person.Forest Bueller_bf said:But you should still have to pay $2000 to $10,000 taxes a year to support the local public school. Right?bear2be2 said:I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.LIB,MR BEARS said:When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.Osodecentx said:
I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?
This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.
If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.
I'm pretty ambivalent here. My brother is retiring as a Jr. High Athletic Coordinator this year, he doesn't care really. Most legit Home School kids are good kids. Most are not all that athletic compared to a 5A/6A school athlete.
My child won the shot put at his TAAPS 4A district area meet a couple years back, I made sure to let him know he would have been 7th in the Arlington middle school district meet. Which is pretty good out of the 30 that competed.
That said, most Home School or small private school kids are not competitive with a top 6A school athlete or shoot even a top 3A athlete, a real home school kid would usually just be along for the ride and not make any real contribution to an average suburban Public school team.
And it's not the real home school athletes that will make this a problematic bill. It's the extreme potential for abuse that will further unlevel the playing field.
Jinx your anecdotal stories are always the best. Every conceivable story, for every conceivable situation, very good stuff.
I'm sure the UIL will try to combat against the type of abuse we're talking about here. But those who really want to game the system will.
My problem with this bill is it creates more problems than it solves. Home-schooled kids already have opportunities to compete athletically in most cases -- and on playing fields with others closer to their level athletically. This rule is creating a ton of potential problems to solve a problem that doesn't even exist.
I was attempting a bit of humor.bear2be2 said:And here's one now.ShooterTX said:bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs...
at this point I thought you were going to engage in some teacher bashing.
I was so relieved that it quickly shifted into teacher-sainthood and public school worship... that was a close one!
So teachers have meaningless jobs now? I could see how someone who ignorantly believes every day at a public school is an episode of Law and Order might think that.
I think it is ironic that you laud teaching so much, and demean the everyday jobs of the parents to such an amazing degree. You characterize anyone who complains about teachers as a "fat, bloated slob with a meaningless job"... amazing. The irony that you attacked me for my joke, is just so rich!
Being a teacher is a job. It is not sainthood or only slightly less important than being the actual Messiah... it's just another job. Sorry to bring the reality, but it's true.
Teacher are replaceable.. just like most jobs and most workers in the world today.. they are not irreplaceable. It's not a particularly easy job, but that doesn't makes it unique. Being a framer in the middle of July in Texas is also an amazingly tough job... but that doesn't make it a saintly profession.
ShooterTX
Yea, I'll agree this will create cheating. Or the potential for such. They need to figure a way to keep that new class of "homeschoolers" from cheating the system.bear2be2 said:The idea that home-schooled kids couldn't previously play sports is a specious one. Just about every decent-sized town or city already has home-school co-op teams that compete in non-league games against UIL schools and compete in their own organization with other collectives like them.Oldbear83 said:
I think each end has problems. People who homeschool their kids should not lose the privilege of playing school sports, not least because as an old official the 'only shows up for practice and game day' thing was pretty common at a lot of urban schools. But I also think it's wise to put some limits on just where a home-schooled kid gets to play, and how he/she is determined to be eligible.
For home-school kids who want to play at a public school sports, the rule should be they are assigned to the public school geographically closest to where they live. Those kids would need to pass the same physical exam and have the same vaccinations as athletes at the school. The kid would have to provide proof of passing a proctored exam showing academic proficiency at the declared grade level, or pass a two hour survey-type exam at the school to demonstrate that proficiency.
And no home-schooled kid gets to automatically make the team or be guaranteed playing time. Just like anyone else, you earn your spot.
There's THESA, the Abilene Hawks, the Lubbock Titans, the Midessa Warriors, etc., etc.
These opportunities already exist for actual home-school kids. The problem with this bill is it's likely to create a new class of "home-school kids" who are inevitably going to create new and unnecessary problems for the public school athletics model.
It doesn't matter how you want to characterize it. That is irrelevant. The bottom line is our taxes pay for it. Period.Booray said:You obviously have never run a school. Giving everyone those options would be a nightmare.Mothra said:Your post seems to suggest there is a problem with the scenario you described. Since a parents' tax dollars are paying for the schooling, I would have no problem whatsoever with that scenario.Booray said:No one is saying that they can't participate in sports. The objectors are saying you can't participate in sports without full time enrollment. Its a parent choice to forego both the benefits and the detriments of public school.Mothra said:So a parent whose taxes go to pay for the public school system shouldn't be able to partake in the the benefits of what their tax dollars support? That doesn't make sense.bear2be2 said:I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.LIB,MR BEARS said:When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.Osodecentx said:
I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?
This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.
If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.
There have been laws on the books for years that special needs children who don't attend public school are allowed the benefit of special needs programs. Why shouldn't the same rule apply to sports?
Next-I'll take math class but not English? Or-I am not really interested in your rules around lunch time campus access so my kid won't obey them? I disagree with the whole evolution conversation so he will be sitting out the next three weeks?
Again, property taxes are not a user fee. You don't have to pay property taxes to use the schools; not having children does not exempt you.
And you keep saying that parents' tax dollars are paying for the schooling without addressing the user fee point. Do apartment dwellers or people with huge ag exemptions not get the benefit that other home schoolers do?
I don't agree with you.
Teachers and farmers both have jobs that are vitally important to the health of a society and neither receives the thanks they deserve for it -- in respect or monetary compensation. The inverse is true of most other occupations.ShooterTX said:I was attempting a bit of humor.bear2be2 said:And here's one now.ShooterTX said:bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs...
at this point I thought you were going to engage in some teacher bashing.
I was so relieved that it quickly shifted into teacher-sainthood and public school worship... that was a close one!
So teachers have meaningless jobs now? I could see how someone who ignorantly believes every day at a public school is an episode of Law and Order might think that.
I think it is ironic that you laud teaching so much, and demean the everyday jobs of the parents to such an amazing degree. You characterize anyone who complains about teachers as a "fat, bloated slob with a meaningless job"... amazing. The irony that you attacked me for my joke, is just so rich!
Being a teacher is a job. It is not sainthood or only slightly less important than being the actual Messiah... it's just another job. Sorry to bring the reality, but it's true.
Teacher are replaceable.. just like most jobs and most workers in the world today.. they are not irreplaceable. It's not a particularly easy job, but that doesn't makes it unique. Being a framer in the middle of July in Texas is also an amazingly tough job... but that doesn't make it a saintly profession.
Teaching is, indeed, a job. But to all good teachers I've ever met, including my wife, mother, sister and cousin, it's also a calling. They make ****ty salaries, deal with troubled and misbehaving kids, put up with endless **** from parents, work silly hours and spend their own money on supplies -- only to be disrespected constantly. And why do they do it? Not because they couldn't find other jobs. They do it because they care about the education and well-being of the kids they teach -- even when their parents don't.
And notice, I don't make any distinction between public and private school teachers. The only real difference I've found is that private school teachers are paid considerably less for some reason.
Its not how "I want to characterize it." It is a how school financing is properly characterized and has been since we wrote the state constitution.Mothra said:It doesn't matter how you want to characterize it. That is irrelevant. The bottom line is our taxes pay for it. Period.Booray said:You obviously have never run a school. Giving everyone those options would be a nightmare.Mothra said:Your post seems to suggest there is a problem with the scenario you described. Since a parents' tax dollars are paying for the schooling, I would have no problem whatsoever with that scenario.Booray said:No one is saying that they can't participate in sports. The objectors are saying you can't participate in sports without full time enrollment. Its a parent choice to forego both the benefits and the detriments of public school.Mothra said:So a parent whose taxes go to pay for the public school system shouldn't be able to partake in the the benefits of what their tax dollars support? That doesn't make sense.bear2be2 said:I'm against it because the public school coaches I deal with on a near daily basis are pretty staunchly against it.LIB,MR BEARS said:When the legislature answers these questions, I'll let you know if I'm for or against it.Osodecentx said:
I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'm curious.
Does No pass, no play rule apply to home school athletes?
Are they required to take Staar tests like public schoolers?
Transferring from one school to another in a different attendance zone is a relatively rigorous process. It requires the 2 schools (one from which student is transferring & one to which student is transferring) to declare whether it is for sports participation.
Will the district EC have jurisdiction over home schoolers like it does over public schoolers?
Grade inflation?
Academic rigor?
This reeks of the type of attack on public school norms we've seen Dan Patrick lead in recent years.
If you don't want to send your kids to public school, fine. But you shouldn't get to demand the benefits of public schooling from outside of that system.
There have been laws on the books for years that special needs children who don't attend public school are allowed the benefit of special needs programs. Why shouldn't the same rule apply to sports?
Next-I'll take math class but not English? Or-I am not really interested in your rules around lunch time campus access so my kid won't obey them? I disagree with the whole evolution conversation so he will be sitting out the next three weeks?
Again, property taxes are not a user fee. You don't have to pay property taxes to use the schools; not having children does not exempt you.
And you keep saying that parents' tax dollars are paying for the schooling without addressing the user fee point. Do apartment dwellers or people with huge ag exemptions not get the benefit that other home schoolers do?
I don't agree with you.
The relevant clause is:
A general diffusion of knowledge being essential to the preservation of the liberties and rights of the people, it shall be the duty of the Legislature of the State to establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools.
The Texas Supreme Court has repeatedly made clear that the phrase means that the taxing plan used to support public schools must be based on the benefit to society as a whole, not the rights of parents of school age children.
Your argument that payment of property taxes gives a right of use as the user sees fit falls apart when the inverse is asked: people who do not pay property taxes would then have no right of use. Or the corollary- childless widows being exempt from property tax. Neither was intended and neither is not how we operate.
So disagree with me-but explain how my logic is incorrect or not a proper reading of the state constitution.
yeah... this is pretty much boilerplate stuff. Anyone who has ever attempted to engage in education reform conversations has heard what you just said.... pretty much verbatim.bear2be2 said:Teachers and farmers both have jobs that are vitally important to the health of a society and neither receives the thanks they deserve for it -- in respect or monetary compensation. The inverse is true of most other occupations.ShooterTX said:I was attempting a bit of humor.bear2be2 said:And here's one now.ShooterTX said:bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs...
at this point I thought you were going to engage in some teacher bashing.
I was so relieved that it quickly shifted into teacher-sainthood and public school worship... that was a close one!
So teachers have meaningless jobs now? I could see how someone who ignorantly believes every day at a public school is an episode of Law and Order might think that.
I think it is ironic that you laud teaching so much, and demean the everyday jobs of the parents to such an amazing degree. You characterize anyone who complains about teachers as a "fat, bloated slob with a meaningless job"... amazing. The irony that you attacked me for my joke, is just so rich!
Being a teacher is a job. It is not sainthood or only slightly less important than being the actual Messiah... it's just another job. Sorry to bring the reality, but it's true.
Teacher are replaceable.. just like most jobs and most workers in the world today.. they are not irreplaceable. It's not a particularly easy job, but that doesn't makes it unique. Being a framer in the middle of July in Texas is also an amazingly tough job... but that doesn't make it a saintly profession.
Teaching is, indeed, a job. But to all good teachers I've ever met, including my wife, mother, sister and cousin, it's also a calling. They make ****ty salaries, deal with troubled and misbehaving kids, put up with endless **** from parents, work silly hours and spend their own money on supplies -- only to be disrespected constantly. And why do they do it? Not because they couldn't find other jobs. They do it because they care about the education and well-being of the kids they teach -- even when their parents don't.
And notice, I don't make any distinction between public and private school teachers. The only real difference I've found is that private school teachers are paid considerably less for some reason.
You are placing teachers on such a high pedestal, that it virtually eliminates the possibility of progress. You are exactly who you expressed yourself to be in the original post... you worship teachers and the teaching profession. Teachers sit at the right hand of Jesus in your world.
There is really no point in trying to have a productive conversation with you on this topic. You have made it clear that any discussions going forward, must be completely "hand off" when it comes to teachers and their responsibilities.
Good luck to you.
ShooterTX
I have made no such thing clear. But I am going to object to any conversation on education/education reform that begins in a place of disrespect for the teaching profession as a whole.ShooterTX said:yeah... this is pretty much boilerplate stuff. Anyone who has ever attempted to engage in education reform conversations has heard what you just said.... pretty much verbatim.bear2be2 said:Teachers and farmers both have jobs that are vitally important to the health of a society and neither receives the thanks they deserve for it -- in respect or monetary compensation. The inverse is true of most other occupations.ShooterTX said:I was attempting a bit of humor.bear2be2 said:And here's one now.ShooterTX said:bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs...
at this point I thought you were going to engage in some teacher bashing.
I was so relieved that it quickly shifted into teacher-sainthood and public school worship... that was a close one!
So teachers have meaningless jobs now? I could see how someone who ignorantly believes every day at a public school is an episode of Law and Order might think that.
I think it is ironic that you laud teaching so much, and demean the everyday jobs of the parents to such an amazing degree. You characterize anyone who complains about teachers as a "fat, bloated slob with a meaningless job"... amazing. The irony that you attacked me for my joke, is just so rich!
Being a teacher is a job. It is not sainthood or only slightly less important than being the actual Messiah... it's just another job. Sorry to bring the reality, but it's true.
Teacher are replaceable.. just like most jobs and most workers in the world today.. they are not irreplaceable. It's not a particularly easy job, but that doesn't makes it unique. Being a framer in the middle of July in Texas is also an amazingly tough job... but that doesn't make it a saintly profession.
Teaching is, indeed, a job. But to all good teachers I've ever met, including my wife, mother, sister and cousin, it's also a calling. They make ****ty salaries, deal with troubled and misbehaving kids, put up with endless **** from parents, work silly hours and spend their own money on supplies -- only to be disrespected constantly. And why do they do it? Not because they couldn't find other jobs. They do it because they care about the education and well-being of the kids they teach -- even when their parents don't.
And notice, I don't make any distinction between public and private school teachers. The only real difference I've found is that private school teachers are paid considerably less for some reason.
You are placing teachers on such a high pedestal, that it virtually eliminates the possibility of progress. You are exactly who you expressed yourself to be in the original post... you worship teachers and the teaching profession. Teachers sit at the right hand of Jesus in your world.
There is really no point in trying to have a productive conversation with you on this topic. You have made it clear that any discussions going forward, must be completely "hand off" when it comes to teachers and their responsibilities.
Good luck to you.
Both my brothers didn't feel disrespected by hardly anybody really, mostly by the Education System itself. Parents and kids praised them all the time, they were coaches though so that may be part of it. But, most folks that interact them are like you, almost like they are talking to members of the military, many people thank them for what they do. Shoot my one brother doesn't like to go out to eat in his schools neighborhood because so many people come up and talk to him. He is a damned good coach though, that has something to do with it. They both also make good money, but not great money, but 80K isn't a bad payday, and they get a couple of months off a year. Their retirement is very good too. Teaching is a great profession, but there are certainly positives to being a coach/teacher. As well as negatives. Like any job.bear2be2 said:I have made no such thing clear. But I am going to object to any conversation on education/education reform that begins in a place disrespect for the teaching profession as a whole.ShooterTX said:yeah... this is pretty much boilerplate stuff. Anyone who has ever attempted to engage in education reform conversations has heard what you just said.... pretty much verbatim.bear2be2 said:Teachers and farmers both have jobs that are vitally important to the health of a society and neither receives the thanks they deserve for it -- in respect or monetary compensation. The inverse is true of most other occupations.ShooterTX said:I was attempting a bit of humor.bear2be2 said:And here's one now.ShooterTX said:bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs...
at this point I thought you were going to engage in some teacher bashing.
I was so relieved that it quickly shifted into teacher-sainthood and public school worship... that was a close one!
So teachers have meaningless jobs now? I could see how someone who ignorantly believes every day at a public school is an episode of Law and Order might think that.
I think it is ironic that you laud teaching so much, and demean the everyday jobs of the parents to such an amazing degree. You characterize anyone who complains about teachers as a "fat, bloated slob with a meaningless job"... amazing. The irony that you attacked me for my joke, is just so rich!
Being a teacher is a job. It is not sainthood or only slightly less important than being the actual Messiah... it's just another job. Sorry to bring the reality, but it's true.
Teacher are replaceable.. just like most jobs and most workers in the world today.. they are not irreplaceable. It's not a particularly easy job, but that doesn't makes it unique. Being a framer in the middle of July in Texas is also an amazingly tough job... but that doesn't make it a saintly profession.
Teaching is, indeed, a job. But to all good teachers I've ever met, including my wife, mother, sister and cousin, it's also a calling. They make ****ty salaries, deal with troubled and misbehaving kids, put up with endless **** from parents, work silly hours and spend their own money on supplies -- only to be disrespected constantly. And why do they do it? Not because they couldn't find other jobs. They do it because they care about the education and well-being of the kids they teach -- even when their parents don't.
And notice, I don't make any distinction between public and private school teachers. The only real difference I've found is that private school teachers are paid considerably less for some reason.
You are placing teachers on such a high pedestal, that it virtually eliminates the possibility of progress. You are exactly who you expressed yourself to be in the original post... you worship teachers and the teaching profession. Teachers sit at the right hand of Jesus in your world.
There is really no point in trying to have a productive conversation with you on this topic. You have made it clear that any discussions going forward, must be completely "hand off" when it comes to teachers and their responsibilities.
Good luck to you.
From your link: "score of those going to public school ". No mention of assessment of former homeschoolers now attending public school. You know, the point I was making.Canon said:quash said:No, I want to include all of them, not just the ones who are homeschooled at the time of testing.Canon said:quash said:Canon said:quash said:Mothra said:Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:
I have always seen athletics as a reward for those students that go to school on a regular basis and pass. Now a parent can check the boxes while Jr. sleeps in, does no work in school and gets to go to practice and play.
Statistics show on average that home school kids do far better than their public school counterparts on standardized tests and the SAT. They are typically one to two grades ahead of their public school counterparts in what they're learning. So I don't think you have any need to worry about home school kids cutting corners.
It strongly depends on which homeschoolers you are adding to your statistics.
A superintendent friend said that the best homeschool setups were mini-private schools where parents pooled kids and talent. But he also got the kids who came back to public schools two years behind.
The statistical population is all homeschooled kids. That's how statistics work.
Homeschool kids statistically do much better academically than public school kids.
https://admissionsly.com/homeschooling-statistics/
Like I said.
If you exclude the homeschool failures you get gaudy numbers. Nice No True Scotsman fallacy, though.
You are the one excluding some homeschool kids. Why are you doing that?
You want to exclude the ones who return to public school. Why are you doing that?
Support your statement. It's not true, so this should be fun.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
I think you misunderstood my question. You made a correlation to college student-athletes which I find confusing. You seem to be suggesting that home-schooled students had the same opportunity to select the school for which they choose to play, hence "a school" and not "their school." My question concerned the fact that "their school" would be the one in their attendance zone, and isn't that the one they would play for if they played, not simply "a school?"Booray said:No, they wouldn't. A kid's school is the school he or she attends. Deals with the teachers, the administrators, the other students and the facilities. The good and the bad.Malbec said:Wouldn't they be playing for their school?Booray said:
If the NCAA announced that athletes no longer needed to attend the school they played for we would say the new rule destroys the purpose of athletics. The same thing applies to high school-athletes are supposed to play for their school, not a school.
As to academic performance, my guess is that Mothra's excelling home schoolers would also excel if they attended public schools.
quash said:From your link: "score of those going to public school ". No mention of assessment of former homeschoolers now attending public school. You know, the point I was making.Canon said:quash said:No, I want to include all of them, not just the ones who are homeschooled at the time of testing.Canon said:quash said:Canon said:quash said:Mothra said:Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:
I have always seen athletics as a reward for those students that go to school on a regular basis and pass. Now a parent can check the boxes while Jr. sleeps in, does no work in school and gets to go to practice and play.
Statistics show on average that home school kids do far better than their public school counterparts on standardized tests and the SAT. They are typically one to two grades ahead of their public school counterparts in what they're learning. So I don't think you have any need to worry about home school kids cutting corners.
It strongly depends on which homeschoolers you are adding to your statistics.
A superintendent friend said that the best homeschool setups were mini-private schools where parents pooled kids and talent. But he also got the kids who came back to public schools two years behind.
The statistical population is all homeschooled kids. That's how statistics work.
Homeschool kids statistically do much better academically than public school kids.
https://admissionsly.com/homeschooling-statistics/
Like I said.
If you exclude the homeschool failures you get gaudy numbers. Nice No True Scotsman fallacy, though.
You are the one excluding some homeschool kids. Why are you doing that?
You want to exclude the ones who return to public school. Why are you doing that?
Support your statement. It's not true, so this should be fun.
The studies reference all homeschoolers vs all others. That's what's studied. And what you want is a magical third category of those who were once homeschoolers but aren't now because you think a number you don't know, with outcomes you can't know, will generate some different result?
That's not how studies like that work. You want there to be a different result, hope it says something bad about homeschoolers and claim there would be without data. Whose to say the majority didn't spend the last year in Texas public school so they could finish at the top 10% and get a free ride to college?
The studies are accurate. They compare the two populations. Stop trying to corrupt the results with your imagination.
Private school teacher typically don't have to put up with as much crap as public school teachers. Usually, if a parent is willing to unload the money it takes to put a kid 5-12 in a private school, they take interest in the kids grades.bear2be2 said:Teachers and farmers both have jobs that are vitally important to the health of a society and neither receives the thanks they deserve for it -- in respect or monetary compensation. The inverse is true of most other occupations.ShooterTX said:I was attempting a bit of humor.bear2be2 said:And here's one now.ShooterTX said:bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs...
at this point I thought you were going to engage in some teacher bashing.
I was so relieved that it quickly shifted into teacher-sainthood and public school worship... that was a close one!
So teachers have meaningless jobs now? I could see how someone who ignorantly believes every day at a public school is an episode of Law and Order might think that.
I think it is ironic that you laud teaching so much, and demean the everyday jobs of the parents to such an amazing degree. You characterize anyone who complains about teachers as a "fat, bloated slob with a meaningless job"... amazing. The irony that you attacked me for my joke, is just so rich!
Being a teacher is a job. It is not sainthood or only slightly less important than being the actual Messiah... it's just another job. Sorry to bring the reality, but it's true.
Teacher are replaceable.. just like most jobs and most workers in the world today.. they are not irreplaceable. It's not a particularly easy job, but that doesn't makes it unique. Being a framer in the middle of July in Texas is also an amazingly tough job... but that doesn't make it a saintly profession.
Teaching is, indeed, a job. But to all good teachers I've ever met, including my wife, mother, sister and cousin, it's also a calling. They make ****ty salaries, deal with troubled and misbehaving kids, put up with endless **** from parents, work silly hours and spend their own money on supplies -- only to be disrespected constantly. And why do they do it? Not because they couldn't find other jobs. They do it because they care about the education and well-being of the kids they teach -- even when their parents don't.
And notice, I don't make any distinction between public and private school teachers. The only real difference I've found is that private school teachers are paid considerably less for some reason.
Both of my kids did private school and while the above is mostly true, there are still wealthy, deadbeat parents that do private school to the extent they pay the tuition. Usually it's because John or Jill can play every sport and make the team with the smaller enrollment.
bear2be2 said:I have made no such thing clear. But I am going to object to any conversation on education/education reform that begins in a place disrespect for the teaching profession as a whole.ShooterTX said:yeah... this is pretty much boilerplate stuff. Anyone who has ever attempted to engage in education reform conversations has heard what you just said.... pretty much verbatim.bear2be2 said:Teachers and farmers both have jobs that are vitally important to the health of a society and neither receives the thanks they deserve for it -- in respect or monetary compensation. The inverse is true of most other occupations.ShooterTX said:I was attempting a bit of humor.bear2be2 said:And here's one now.ShooterTX said:bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs...
at this point I thought you were going to engage in some teacher bashing.
I was so relieved that it quickly shifted into teacher-sainthood and public school worship... that was a close one!
So teachers have meaningless jobs now? I could see how someone who ignorantly believes every day at a public school is an episode of Law and Order might think that.
I think it is ironic that you laud teaching so much, and demean the everyday jobs of the parents to such an amazing degree. You characterize anyone who complains about teachers as a "fat, bloated slob with a meaningless job"... amazing. The irony that you attacked me for my joke, is just so rich!
Being a teacher is a job. It is not sainthood or only slightly less important than being the actual Messiah... it's just another job. Sorry to bring the reality, but it's true.
Teacher are replaceable.. just like most jobs and most workers in the world today.. they are not irreplaceable. It's not a particularly easy job, but that doesn't makes it unique. Being a framer in the middle of July in Texas is also an amazingly tough job... but that doesn't make it a saintly profession.
Teaching is, indeed, a job. But to all good teachers I've ever met, including my wife, mother, sister and cousin, it's also a calling. They make ****ty salaries, deal with troubled and misbehaving kids, put up with endless **** from parents, work silly hours and spend their own money on supplies -- only to be disrespected constantly. And why do they do it? Not because they couldn't find other jobs. They do it because they care about the education and well-being of the kids they teach -- even when their parents don't.
And notice, I don't make any distinction between public and private school teachers. The only real difference I've found is that private school teachers are paid considerably less for some reason.
You are placing teachers on such a high pedestal, that it virtually eliminates the possibility of progress. You are exactly who you expressed yourself to be in the original post... you worship teachers and the teaching profession. Teachers sit at the right hand of Jesus in your world.
There is really no point in trying to have a productive conversation with you on this topic. You have made it clear that any discussions going forward, must be completely "hand off" when it comes to teachers and their responsibilities.
Good luck to you.
Shooter,
The fear from the the "public employees as demigod" crowd became palpable about halfway through Covid, when everyone realized how much better they could do teaching their own kids, how much better their kids did in half the time, how much propaganda was being dispensed to their children, how much wasted time goes on in public schools and how rampant poor teaching is.
It was the confluence of these factors that relaunched the breathless, effusive public virtue signaling about how indispensable public teachers are, by leftists. It's one of the big lies they tell....and it had become patently absurd to parents virtually overnight. Expect to hear it repeated, ad-Goebbels, for the next few years.
Teachers are very well paid, get amazing (early...prior to 60) retirements, summers off, require only a limited education past HS, and are virtually immune to termination. The vast majority now are after the stability, the benefits and the constant fluffing about their 'avocation'. The handful who actually care are great. Unfortunately, they are as rare as hen's teeth.
bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs selling widgets trash teachers, who are often some of the most selfless, devoted people you'll ever meet.
You must have really hated listening to the countless fit, svelte, athletic, business people who make your whole world work and without whom you'd be crying helpless on the floor of a powerless kitchen with no food, due to your lack of skills, accurately criticize teachers who were found to be useless as anything but babysitters and who signed onto the job for early retirements, summers off and immunity from termination.
If you think you can do better, great. No teacher likely wants to deal with you or teach your kids anyway.Canon said:bear2be2 said:I have made no such thing clear. But I am going to object to any conversation on education/education reform that begins in a place disrespect for the teaching profession as a whole.ShooterTX said:yeah... this is pretty much boilerplate stuff. Anyone who has ever attempted to engage in education reform conversations has heard what you just said.... pretty much verbatim.bear2be2 said:Teachers and farmers both have jobs that are vitally important to the health of a society and neither receives the thanks they deserve for it -- in respect or monetary compensation. The inverse is true of most other occupations.ShooterTX said:I was attempting a bit of humor.bear2be2 said:And here's one now.ShooterTX said:bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs...
at this point I thought you were going to engage in some teacher bashing.
I was so relieved that it quickly shifted into teacher-sainthood and public school worship... that was a close one!
So teachers have meaningless jobs now? I could see how someone who ignorantly believes every day at a public school is an episode of Law and Order might think that.
I think it is ironic that you laud teaching so much, and demean the everyday jobs of the parents to such an amazing degree. You characterize anyone who complains about teachers as a "fat, bloated slob with a meaningless job"... amazing. The irony that you attacked me for my joke, is just so rich!
Being a teacher is a job. It is not sainthood or only slightly less important than being the actual Messiah... it's just another job. Sorry to bring the reality, but it's true.
Teacher are replaceable.. just like most jobs and most workers in the world today.. they are not irreplaceable. It's not a particularly easy job, but that doesn't makes it unique. Being a framer in the middle of July in Texas is also an amazingly tough job... but that doesn't make it a saintly profession.
Teaching is, indeed, a job. But to all good teachers I've ever met, including my wife, mother, sister and cousin, it's also a calling. They make ****ty salaries, deal with troubled and misbehaving kids, put up with endless **** from parents, work silly hours and spend their own money on supplies -- only to be disrespected constantly. And why do they do it? Not because they couldn't find other jobs. They do it because they care about the education and well-being of the kids they teach -- even when their parents don't.
And notice, I don't make any distinction between public and private school teachers. The only real difference I've found is that private school teachers are paid considerably less for some reason.
You are placing teachers on such a high pedestal, that it virtually eliminates the possibility of progress. You are exactly who you expressed yourself to be in the original post... you worship teachers and the teaching profession. Teachers sit at the right hand of Jesus in your world.
There is really no point in trying to have a productive conversation with you on this topic. You have made it clear that any discussions going forward, must be completely "hand off" when it comes to teachers and their responsibilities.
Good luck to you.
Shooter,
The fear from the the "public employees as demigod" crowd became palpable about halfway through Covid, when everyone realized how much better they could do teaching their own kids, how much better their kids did in half the time, how much propaganda was being dispensed to their children, how much wasted time goes on in public schools and how rampant poor teaching is.
It was the confluence of these factors that relaunched the breathless, effusive public virtue signaling about how indispensable public teachers are, by leftists. It's one of the big lies they tell....and it had become patently absurd to parents virtually overnight. Expect to hear it repeated, ad-Goebbels, for the next few years.
Teachers are very well paid, get amazing (early...prior to 60) retirements, summers off, require only a limited education past HS, and are virtually immune to termination. The vast majority now are after the stability, the benefits and the constant fluffing about their 'avocation'. The handful who actually care are great. Unfortunately, they are as rare as hen's teeth.
Malbec said:I think you misunderstood my question. You made a correlation to college student-athletes which I find confusing. You seem to be suggesting that home-schooled students had the same opportunity to select the school for which they choose to play, hence "a school" and not "their school." My question concerned the fact that "their school" would be the one in their attendance zone, and isn't that the one they would play for if they played, not simply "a school?"Booray said:No, they wouldn't. A kid's school is the school he or she attends. Deals with the teachers, the administrators, the other students and the facilities. The good and the bad.Malbec said:Wouldn't they be playing for their school?Booray said:
If the NCAA announced that athletes no longer needed to attend the school they played for we would say the new rule destroys the purpose of athletics. The same thing applies to high school-athletes are supposed to play for their school, not a school.
As to academic performance, my guess is that Mothra's excelling home schoolers would also excel if they attended public schools.
First, your assumption would often be incorrect. With school choice and magnets, people often have several options of which school they can attend. Second, there will be some families who will move for the best opportunity.
Second and more importantly, I was focused on the concept of school as a community. We recognize our athletes as Baylor Bears because they attend classes at Baylor. There is a commonality between the athletes and the rest of the student body. The whole enterprise of "us versus them" depends on the athletes being part of us.
So it's one thing to live around the school; it's another to be part of the school.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
"There have been laws on the books for years that special needs children who don't attend public school are allowed the benefit of special needs programs. Why shouldn't the same rule apply to sports?"
Amazing that anyone that knows anything about SPED would say such a thing. Homeschooled SPED kids can still receive the support of the local schools SPED program. What does that have to do with sports?
Amazing that anyone that knows anything about SPED would say such a thing. Homeschooled SPED kids can still receive the support of the local schools SPED program. What does that have to do with sports?
I have found theres only two ways to go:
Living fast or dying slow.
I dont want to live forever.
But I will live while I'm here.
Living fast or dying slow.
I dont want to live forever.
But I will live while I'm here.
bear2be2 said:If you think you can do better, great. No teacher likely wants to deal with you or teach your kids anyway.Canon said:bear2be2 said:I have made no such thing clear. But I am going to object to any conversation on education/education reform that begins in a place disrespect for the teaching profession as a whole.ShooterTX said:yeah... this is pretty much boilerplate stuff. Anyone who has ever attempted to engage in education reform conversations has heard what you just said.... pretty much verbatim.bear2be2 said:Teachers and farmers both have jobs that are vitally important to the health of a society and neither receives the thanks they deserve for it -- in respect or monetary compensation. The inverse is true of most other occupations.ShooterTX said:I was attempting a bit of humor.bear2be2 said:And here's one now.ShooterTX said:bear2be2 said:
One of my least favorite parts of the pandemic was listening to a bunch fat, bloated slobs with meaningless jobs...
at this point I thought you were going to engage in some teacher bashing.
I was so relieved that it quickly shifted into teacher-sainthood and public school worship... that was a close one!
So teachers have meaningless jobs now? I could see how someone who ignorantly believes every day at a public school is an episode of Law and Order might think that.
I think it is ironic that you laud teaching so much, and demean the everyday jobs of the parents to such an amazing degree. You characterize anyone who complains about teachers as a "fat, bloated slob with a meaningless job"... amazing. The irony that you attacked me for my joke, is just so rich!
Being a teacher is a job. It is not sainthood or only slightly less important than being the actual Messiah... it's just another job. Sorry to bring the reality, but it's true.
Teacher are replaceable.. just like most jobs and most workers in the world today.. they are not irreplaceable. It's not a particularly easy job, but that doesn't makes it unique. Being a framer in the middle of July in Texas is also an amazingly tough job... but that doesn't make it a saintly profession.
Teaching is, indeed, a job. But to all good teachers I've ever met, including my wife, mother, sister and cousin, it's also a calling. They make ****ty salaries, deal with troubled and misbehaving kids, put up with endless **** from parents, work silly hours and spend their own money on supplies -- only to be disrespected constantly. And why do they do it? Not because they couldn't find other jobs. They do it because they care about the education and well-being of the kids they teach -- even when their parents don't.
And notice, I don't make any distinction between public and private school teachers. The only real difference I've found is that private school teachers are paid considerably less for some reason.
You are placing teachers on such a high pedestal, that it virtually eliminates the possibility of progress. You are exactly who you expressed yourself to be in the original post... you worship teachers and the teaching profession. Teachers sit at the right hand of Jesus in your world.
There is really no point in trying to have a productive conversation with you on this topic. You have made it clear that any discussions going forward, must be completely "hand off" when it comes to teachers and their responsibilities.
Good luck to you.
Shooter,
The fear from the the "public employees as demigod" crowd became palpable about halfway through Covid, when everyone realized how much better they could do teaching their own kids, how much better their kids did in half the time, how much propaganda was being dispensed to their children, how much wasted time goes on in public schools and how rampant poor teaching is.
It was the confluence of these factors that relaunched the breathless, effusive public virtue signaling about how indispensable public teachers are, by leftists. It's one of the big lies they tell....and it had become patently absurd to parents virtually overnight. Expect to hear it repeated, ad-Goebbels, for the next few years.
Teachers are very well paid, get amazing (early...prior to 60) retirements, summers off, require only a limited education past HS, and are virtually immune to termination. The vast majority now are after the stability, the benefits and the constant fluffing about their 'avocation'. The handful who actually care are great. Unfortunately, they are as rare as hen's teeth.
I have done better. A great deal better. It took less time and the results were exceptional.
The teachers didn't like me, you are correct. I sent back assignments with corrections (misspellings, grammatical issues, incorrect math problems, scientific inaccuracies) and asked them to please check their assignments before sending them home. I sent foot noted materials back highlighting several grossly inaccurate statements about history and science. I embarrassed them and they disliked it.
I made sure my kids were aware of each and every lazy mistake or intentional mischaracterization. I taught my kids both sides of issues and explained what propaganda was using the one sided propaganda they received in many cases as an object lesson. The greatest fun was turning environmental propaganda lessons on their heads and sending back well researched projects that debunked the point of the assignment. It meant the only way for the teacher to object was to admit my kids were correct (citations helped) and explain the point was to push their point of view. We actually had a teacher delete my daughter's assignment because it demonstrated the teachers begging the question was wrong.
This taught my kids that teachers are not generally trustworthy as authority figures or final arbiters of truth and they should always seek both sides to determine where truth actually exists. I had a great many examples available to drive home this point. This was the best part of Covid.