It's more expensive and harder to educate the bottom quintile. People choose universities, neighborhoods to live in and places to vacation in to avoid the bottom quintile. People discriminate all the time. Middle and upper-middle class Americans pay a premium for housing to avoid living next to the bottom quintile. I asked my wife to marry me after I discriminated against several other women by not giving them the option to say yes. I'm sure some were o.k. with that.
Sometimes the root cause is parents. Choose your parents wisely.
It is not an unpopular opinion among educators today that many underqualified coaches end up getting promoted unfairly. It's worth at least discussing.
A lot of times it is. The biggest negative impact they can have is not being actively involved in their child's education.
For every bad coach/teacher.... i can show a bad teacher that doesnt coach. Same for administration. It may be a popular opinion of some, but it doesnt mean its correct. There are good and bad hires everywhere. Truly unfair to just lump coaches into it.
Part of the issue with giving people choice is that sometimes they'll make choices you don't agree with. I'm willing to live with parents who think their kid is the next Michael Jordan/Pat Mahomes if it means that another 10 parents can get their kids a good education and they can go on to become doctors or engineers.
I get where you're coming from. And you must be a coach or close to one because you're really getting defensive about that point. I'm just saying you're painting with a very broad brush. I don't agree with the approach broadly. I do see some value in it situationally. And that's how these things should be evaluated - situationally.
I don't dispute these issues. That is why it would be opt-in for private schools. I'm not advocating for tax dollars to private schools with no strings attached. That is why I think some private schools would opt in, others wouldn't. For example, if a private school can maintain enrollment while charging the same or more than what they would get from the government for each student, they would not be incentivized to opt in.
Well, when it comes to educational choices, there are states, and then there's OUR state. Our state education system has been effed up since the beginning of time. We've got too much bloat, and we cater too much to local politics at the county level. When I look at a poor-assed backwoods county like Tate County, which has two different public school systems, and a private school because the folks with a little bit of money don't want their kids going to public schools for various reasons, and that county is poorer than dirt to begin with, it's a big problem. And just about every county in the state is in similar shape. DeSoto is fine, Lee is fine, counties on the coast are fine. But most of the counties in this state are just like Tate - and it's messed up.
I've never seen a school choice proposal do anything like that. Because it's not actually about school choice. It's about getting public dollars for private schools, with no significant change as to which students are going where, or irs about killing the public school model.
I think you are misinterpreting my argument.
I can guarentee that failing schools usually arent failing because they are focused on athletics. Matter of fact I'd argue none of them are... and taking athletics away isnt going to make them shape up quickly. Its again one of the dumbest things ever posted.
The person who agrees with me 80% of the time is not my enemy. We agree on the problem, we agree on the solution, we differ on the way to get there.
OK, I can't speak for someone else any more than you can.
In Desoto County everyone wants to send their kids to Lewisburg or Hernando. Those schools are overflowing as it is. I'm a proponent of school choice but it's just not as simple as getting to choose. Someone else said "you choose when you buy the house" and I think that's part of this.
That's why I think the best proposal in Mississippi is:
Lots to swallow there.
If a kid goes to a specific school because of the sport, and the school puts more value in the success of the sport over the success of the student in the classroom, then threatening the sport should be on the table.
You do realize there are rules in place where students have to make certain grades and reach certain marks to be able to play. That includes being on track to graduate.
This is a sports message board, there are lots of options that should be looked at. Merit-based teacher pay, for example. Let's pay our great teachers more than our bad teachers and see if that incentivizes teachers to be better!
You realize that schools let by admins that prioritize sports over academics typically don't give a damn about whether students are meeting eligibility requirements to play, right?
So just to be sure:
you do realize that there are again rules in place where the schools and admins dont get to turn a blind eye to this correct?
You reference discrimination in private life and spending private money, and also use the term in an obviously different way that how I used it.
You need to put that broad brush down that you're painting with. It's worn out at this point.
Is it your assertion that all these football powerhouses in the state follow eligibility requirements to the letter?
Schools that attract enrollment would receive funding to expand. Schools that get too big would become less attractive. I'm not saying your concern isn't valid. I'm just saying that it's an obstacle that can be addressed.
and again, no school is failing because they are prioritizing athletics. They are failing due to a weatlth of other issues.
Ok bud, when you gonna stop then?
ok, but note that no "school choice" proposals do so. Gives the game away, doesnt it?
I could be behind that. It's not as easy as just putting a $ amount on each student in enrollment though. That would work in some areas, would be mass chaos in others (Atlanta suburbs for example). Would probably need to put a fee on it, maybe means tested. Keep in mind the folks least able to move to a better school district are mostly the same ones that could not commute their kid to a farther away school.
With how cut throat sports are now. You'd be suprised. There are many ways an athlete can be elgible. I can assure you, the football power houses dont have any slipping thru the cracks, let alone and entire program full of them they are weasling around the eligbiltiy requirements.
Youd need to come up with a good system of merit. I think its a good idea if you can figure out how to make a fair scoreboard. Like most winning coaches get paid more than losing... good teachers can make more than ones that arent quiet as good.
That wasn't in reply to you. If that's not you, I'm not talking about you, am I? You replied to me (twice) saying school choice isn't about choice, it's about tax dollars going to private schools. I explained my position, and you still wanted to argue a straw man. I'm just saying take that up with someone who holds that position.
Again, I don't speak for proposals that aren't mine. Consider this a new proposal: School choice, excluding private schools. It expands choice for all families, including poor families, and doesn't provide any tax dollars to private schools.
I'm not arguing a strawman, I'm arguing the actual bills proposed and passed into law under the banner of what you say you support. If you don't support the bills proposed and passed under "school choice"...then you don't support it the same as I don't, for the same reasons. That's kinda important to establish!
obviously you dont no clue how it works. f you think there are schools skirting elgibility rules and admin turning blind eyes to it.. and the while no one in the state is reporting it.
And you can find at least three kids (and I'm being kind here) on any one of probably over half of the state's football programs who do not qualify or has cheated to qualify but has managed to continue playing anyway.
if you deal in facts. Then please show us these cases?
