|
|
Post by title1parent on May 14, 2009 6:13:28 GMT -5
www.suburbanchicagonews.com/beaconnews/news/1573658,2_1_AU14_BATSKL_S1.article Batavia may allow private schoolers on public teams May 14, 2009 By DENISE LINKE For The Beacon News BATAVIA -- Batavia children who don't attend Batavia's public schools should still be allowed to participate in School District-run sports, clubs and arts groups, Board of Education members tentatively decided this week. "If I have residents who are paying taxes to us and want to use our facilities, I have a hard time saying no," said board President Ron Link. The district has always allowed home-schooled children who live within district boundaries to join clubs, teams and music groups at the schools they would normally attend. Illinois High School Association rules provide for home-schoolers to compete on local public school teams, Link noted. Two years ago, a district staff member allowed a seventh-grader attending a private school to play on Rotolo Middle School's basketball team. Though officials later decided that action was a misinterpretation of School District policy, last year the board voted to let that student and a classmate play on Rotolo's eighth-grade basketball team. "I later found out that Rotolo had to hold tryouts and turn some students away because there wasn't enough room in the program for everybody who wanted to participate," said board member Jack Hinterlong. "We cut other kids who went to Rotolo while these (private school) students were able to play. If I'd known that at the time, I would have voted against it." Board member Jayne Resek said fitting non-students into more popular programs could be a chronic problem, especially at Rotolo. "We can't fit kids into some activities now. It's hard to say that we're going to give spots to kids who don't go to the school," she said. Board member Joseph Purpura proposed that private school students be allowed to join district activities only if their own schools do not offer similar activities. Link countered that the availability of private school programs should not matter, since families living within the district support all district programs through their property taxes. The proposed policy was returned to the board's Policy Committee for further study.
|
|
|
|
Post by momto4 on May 14, 2009 10:05:12 GMT -5
This is a difficult subject. On the surface, it appears that people living within the district and paying taxes should have access to the clubs and teams. But on the other hand, these families chose to go a different route with their schooling and those who actually attend the public schools it seems should have first dibs over those who don't. And then what about home-schoolers? I know of people who home-school in various areas around the country and usually their children can participate in certain activities in their home school districts if they choose.
Are the clubs and teams something set up for students who attend school in the district or for those who live in the district?
I'm leaning toward thinking these amenities are for those who attend the schools...
|
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on May 14, 2009 11:14:39 GMT -5
And they should be thanked for it, as they are saving the taxpayers money by not having to educate their children.
Based on what?
I don't think it would be a great thing if the majority of a team were "outsiders," but I think the number of these private participants is extremely low.
|
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on May 14, 2009 14:34:10 GMT -5
Interesting issue Batavia is dealing with.
Here is what IHSA says on home-schooled students:
IHSA by-laws do not prohibit participation in interscholastic athletics by home schooled students at IHSA member high schools. On the other hand, IHSA by-laws also do not mandate that member schools permit home schooled students to participate. The determination of whether home schooled children in a given community may or may not participate on their local school’s interscholastic athletic and activity teams is the responsibility of the local school.
IHSA By-law 3.011 includes provisions which permit interscholastic participation by home schooled students at their local IHSA member school, under specified conditions. By-law 3.011 states:
3.011 A student must attend a member school and may only represent in interscholastic competition the member school the student attends. For purposes of this by-law, the term "attend" shall mean that the student is enrolled at the member school, and is taking at, or under arrangements approved by the member school, a minimum of twenty (20) credit hours of work for which credit toward high school graduation will be granted by the member school upon the student's completing and passing the courses. The school which enrolls the student shall be exclusively responsible to verify the student's compliance with all of the eligibility requirements of all IHSA by-laws.
Under the provisions of this by-law, any student, including one who is home schooled, must meet four specific requirements to be eligible for interscholastic participation:
1. The student must be enrolled at the member high school;
2. The student must be taking and passing a minimum of twenty (20) credit hours of work (the equivalent of four .5 credit courses) at the member school or in a program approved by the member school on a weekly and semester;
3. The student must be granted credit toward graduation by the member school for the work taken either at the member school or in a program it approved.
4. The student must be in compliance with all the eligibility requirements of all IHSA by-laws. (Residence, Transfer, Scholastic Standing, etc).
HomeSchoolFactSheet
Updated 8/25/08
|
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on May 14, 2009 14:41:52 GMT -5
This is a difficult subject. On the surface, it appears that people living within the district and paying taxes should have access to the clubs and teams. ...... Are the clubs and teams something set up for students who attend school in the district or for those who live in the district? I'm leaning toward thinking these amenities are for those who attend the schools... My feeling says home-schooing is a differnent matter. I believe they should be allowed to participate, because by definition with only be schooled at your home, one cannot for example form a baseball team or a marching band. But if you chose to go to a private school, and being on the baseball team or band is important to you, then that should guide you choice in private school. I almost say, if a student wants to participate in something and their own private school doesnt have it.....then they are at the wrong private school, perhaps. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on May 14, 2009 15:28:19 GMT -5
This is a difficult subject. On the surface, it appears that people living within the district and paying taxes should have access to the clubs and teams. ...... Are the clubs and teams something set up for students who attend school in the district or for those who live in the district? I'm leaning toward thinking these amenities are for those who attend the schools... My feeling says home-schooing is a differnent matter. I believe they should be allowed to participate, because by definition with only be schooled at your home, one cannot for example form a baseball team or a marching band. But if you chose to go to a private school, and being on the baseball team or band is important to you, then that should guide you choice in private school. I almost say, if a student wants to participate in something and their own private school doesnt have it.....then they are at the wrong private school, perhaps. This would be my opinion too |
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on May 14, 2009 16:49:08 GMT -5
Why should the private school student be penalized and a home schooled student not? Both families made a decision, presumably mostly for academic reasons, to avoid public school. I don't see the difference.
|
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on May 14, 2009 20:34:17 GMT -5
Why should the private school student be penalized and a home schooled student not? Both families made a decision, presumably mostly for academic reasons, to avoid public school. I don't see the difference. This is not a penalty. Extra-curriculars are for students of the school. The home-schooled children I know of are enrolled in band, PE classes through the public school not just extra-curriculars. I am sorry that some of the private schools people chose to send their children to do not have the opportunities that many of our public schools do. Its a choice the parents have made. |
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on May 14, 2009 21:25:22 GMT -5
Is the point of this anecdotal evidence to imply that you oppose allowing home-schooled children the opportunity to participate in extra-curriculars if they do not also utilize the public school for certain "in-school" activities?
But if the district decides to allow it, which I think is only fair, would you have a problem with it? Aren't these taxpayers entitled to something for their donation?
|
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on May 14, 2009 21:36:22 GMT -5
Is the point of this anecdotal evidence to imply that you oppose allowing home-schooled children the opportunity to participate in extra-curriculars if they do not also utilize the public school for certain "in-school" activities? But if the district decides to allow it, which I think is only fair, would you have a problem with it? Aren't these taxpayers entitled to something for their donation? No, I have no problem with home-schooled children taking classes in our district and participating in extra-curriculars. I have known many over the years in this district. I was pointing out, those home-schooled children are actually students, enrolled in the district where as students from other schools, private, are not. The taxpayers are entitled to send their children to public schools for a public school education. |
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on May 14, 2009 21:56:43 GMT -5
May I ask why you feel private school students should not be entitled to the same treatment as home-schooled kids? I am trying to figure why, other than for resentment or jealousy, why someone would want to prevent children from participating in activities or classes their families have paid for -- and why it shouldn't also apply to home-schooled kids.
|
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on May 15, 2009 9:39:53 GMT -5
May I ask why you feel private school students should not be entitled to the same treatment as home-schooled kids? I am trying to figure why, other than for resentment or jealousy, why someone would want to prevent children from participating in activities or classes their families have paid for -- and why it shouldn't also apply to home-schooled kids. Asmo, where do you get the off-the-wall idea that this is about resentment or jeaslousy? Why are you jumping to this conclusion? I will try to explain more what it is about (without using resentment and jealously as my reasoning!) Its not about about "penalizing" anybody at all. Its about recognizing parents and students make curricular ( and extra-curricular choices) about what school they attend. For me, I recongize that a home school student has extra-curricular impossiblities since its a "school of one": The extra cirurricular limits were really not a "choice" made by the parents and students I think this is pretty much a non-issue. If a private school student wants to be on the non-sports club...they would form one at their own school. Also with the widespread privatization of travel sports in this area....a motivated private school student would get involved that way rather than school teams. (the travel teams are at a higher level.....many times way higher level... than school teams, with the exception of football, and maybe basketball). I was thinking of this question from the other way: what if a student attending a public school wanted to play for a team at a private school? They were willing to pay some fraction of tuition (some appropriate fraction that covers the cost of the sports program.... maybe they are willing to pay double or triple the actual cost). Say the public school doesnt have the team (lacrosse, may be example.) Would this make sense? Would a private school allow this? To me, this does not make sense. And it help illustrates why the other way doesnt make sense either. |
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on May 15, 2009 9:50:11 GMT -5
.... Both families made a decision, presumably mostly for academic reasons, to avoid public school. This is off the direct topic but.... My experience says most private school decisions around here are about faith and religious matters. Off the top of my head, I cannot think of one private HS in this area that is not religious affiliated. I dont think its fair at all to catagorize these families as "avoiding public school." I would describing it as them chosing to emphasize the specific faith aspects for the students during their school day. edit: so I truly see it in a positive way....what they are gaining, not what they are "avoiding" |
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on May 15, 2009 10:39:46 GMT -5
Because I have yet to see a plausible argument for treating the two situations differently.
Let's take it from the top...
1. Home school is a choice, just as private school is a choice, and neither gets a reduction in taxes.
2. The decision to go the home school route and the decision to go to a private school may have absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the available public school. As you mentioned, the private school decision may be based on religious beliefs. It can also be based on safety concerns or academic reasons.
3. Home schooled kids by definition have no extra-curriculars; but similarly, private schools may not offer the extra-curriculars that a particular student desires.
But the choice to home school must also factor in the possibility that extra-curriculars are not available, right? If not, why? Let's say two kids each love baseball and would really like to play for their local public school team. One is home schooled, and the other goes to a private school that offers basketball but not baseball. What I am hearing is that you would allow the home schooled kid to play, but tell the private school student to forget baseball and take up basketball instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on May 15, 2009 10:47:56 GMT -5
By the way, this private school backlash has been taken to absurd levels recently, with some parents complaining that students who attend private school from K-8 should not be allowed to attend public schools for HS. I will try to find the story, but I believe a magnet HS in Chicago was seeing an increase in private school graduates enrolling (possibly due to the economy), and the kids who had attended public school were getting rejected at a higher rate than usual. The parents argued that the private school kids shouldn't be able to compete for spots over the public school kids.
|
|
