Private Schools

The Latest 400 or so Topics

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

HShockeywatcher
Posts: 6848
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:21 pm

Post by HShockeywatcher » Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:19 am

hockey_is_a_choice wrote:The fact is that while some schools do recruit, both public and private, the recruiting usually takes place through the parents. The reality is that beginning a few years ago high school teams are filled with boys who have played hockey year round since they were mites. This change more than any other factor (including recruiting) has leveled the playing field among the privates and public schools that are located in wealthier communities or communities where it is hip to make financial sacrifices for junior to play hockey year round.
When it comes down to it, do people honestly want a situation where the positive things (and negative) about things in our lives, like schools, businesses and the like, are not shared?
That is how most of the "recruiting" happens at both public and private schools. I don't personally like the idea of letting people get up and enroll wherever they want because of all of the negative socioeconomic externalities of that, but the idea of competition within the education system should be something that drives it to make it better.
In the end, the only want to entice someone to go to your program is by having a better product to offer.
urban iceman wrote:
HockeyBum wrote:I am one northern fan that will miss STA, Hate to see them go out on top... and would have loved to had a chance at them again this year. They are great competition and if you get rid of anyone that can put a quality team on the ice all you have is a JV tourney. I would rather loss to a great team than win against a substandard team.
Then go back to open enrollment so the smaller schools can recruit like the St Thomas' do to even it up a little. The smaller schools can't help it if their hands are tied to enrollment, that doesn't make it a "JV" tourney. They for the most part follow the rules, whens the last time you saw an Eden Prairie player transfer to say, Northfield? I think the big school arrogance is what takes away from the smaller school tourney getting any respect. The A players are left out of mostly everything defining top hockey players i.e, Mister hockey, All Metro etc by even the Media Jackels : :evil:
huh? We have open enrollment now...

almostashappy
Posts: 930
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:07 pm

Post by almostashappy » Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:28 am

Nevertoomuchhockey wrote: Community Association hockey, working within strictly enforced borders that mirror public school attendance boundaries, and only made possible by the hundreds or thousands of volunteer hours donated by members of the community, were never designed to lock in future varsity players. It was to develop players, good bad rec or D1. Can you imagine the ire and anger of entire communities aimed at you because you transferred to new job or career after working at an entry level or internship position after college? Are you going to accuse me of "betrayal" when I leave for a better job for myself and my family?
There, fixed that for ya. 8)

For better or worse, hockey families and youth hockey teams are brought together based on which local public high school attendance area they live in. These youth teams almost always wear the local public high school team's colors, and adopt the public high school team's mascot as their own. They represent the community, as defined by public high school attendance areas.

The cost to play on these youth teams is heavily subsidized by the community...both through the countless volunteer hours that are donated by parents and members of the community, and by direct financial support (who do you think buys all of those pizzas/gift cards/meat raffle tickets/pull tabs?). In short, the community, defined by public high school collection boundaries, is invested in these youth teams and in its players. And when you are invested in something/someone, you are more prone to feelings of betrayal if that something or someone leaves.

You threw out the jobs scenario as an obvious strawman, but there are real life examples where (right or wrong) there are similar feelings of betrayal when individuals or companies decide to move on to greener pastures. Just ask LeBron James and the City of Cleveland. Or the City of Baltimore when the Colts fled by night. Or more to the point...to a city or state that offers tax incentives and/or community grants to a fledgling business, only to see that company/factory off-shoring jobs later on.

urban iceman
Posts: 388
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 8:40 am

Post by urban iceman » Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:31 am

HShockeywatcher wrote:
hockey_is_a_choice wrote:The fact is that while some schools do recruit, both public and private, the recruiting usually takes place through the parents. The reality is that beginning a few years ago high school teams are filled with boys who have played hockey year round since they were mites. This change more than any other factor (including recruiting) has leveled the playing field among the privates and public schools that are located in wealthier communities or communities where it is hip to make financial sacrifices for junior to play hockey year round.
When it comes down to it, do people honestly want a situation where the positive things (and negative) about things in our lives, like schools, businesses and the like, are not shared?
That is how most of the "recruiting" happens at both public and private schools. I don't personally like the idea of letting people get up and enroll wherever they want because of all of the negative socioeconomic externalities of that, but the idea of competition within the education system should be something that drives it to make it better.
In the end, the only want to entice someone to go to your program is by having a better product to offer.
urban iceman wrote:
HockeyBum wrote:I am one northern fan that will miss STA, Hate to see them go out on top... and would have loved to had a chance at them again this year. They are great competition and if you get rid of anyone that can put a quality team on the ice all you have is a JV tourney. I would rather loss to a great team than win against a substandard team.
Then go back to open enrollment so the smaller schools can recruit like the St Thomas' do to even it up a little. The smaller schools can't help it if their hands are tied to enrollment, that doesn't make it a "JV" tourney. They for the most part follow the rules, whens the last time you saw an Eden Prairie player transfer to say, Northfield? I think the big school arrogance is what takes away from the smaller school tourney getting any respect. The A players are left out of mostly everything defining top hockey players i.e, Mister hockey, All Metro etc by even the Media Jackels : :evil:
huh? We have open enrollment now...
Ummm, read it again.

Cadets16
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2014 7:39 pm

Post by Cadets16 » Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:59 am

People really just amp this whole recruiting issue up because it's hockey - granted this is a hockey forum, and we live in the State of Hockey.

However, where is the argument and accusations of recruiting for the public schools? Are we just assuming that Apple Valley and Simley don't recruit for wrestling? What about Hopkins for basketball? Eden Praire for football?

While these schools may not directly recruit to the athletes themselves, the success of the programs themselves draws kids in. The same can be said for STA, Hill, Breck, Holy Family, or any of the privates.

The success of a the school's programs entices kids to attend- whether it is football, hockey, swimming, academics, fine arts or academic competitions.

BlueLineSpecial
Posts: 1130
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:42 am
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU!!!!

Post by BlueLineSpecial » Sun Mar 02, 2014 11:47 am

This private school bashing is discriminatory. And bullying! We are a minority group and I plan on contacting the ACLU about this!

Okay now that I have that out of my system. Not sure why I'm even joining the fracas because it's no-win. But in between my nieces piano recital and bar dart league tonight I need to fill the void:

Privates have an unfair advantage. The sustained success and growth in hockey at private schools such as HM, STA, BSM, Holy Angels (until the last couple years), Breck, Totino, CDH, and even Duluth Marshall is NOT organic and it's not because all these families want a great education and being good at hockey is simply a byproduct.

I'm a private school guy. And the 'open enrollment exists so all is equal' argument that private school backers use doesn't hold a lot of water to me.

With that all said, kicking privates to their own tourney or continually complaining without offering up actual solutions doesn't accomplish anything either. Maybe it means putting all the privates into one or even two sections? Maybe it means creating a rule that if you transfer to a private after high school and without a physical move in residence you have to sit a year?

Always a fun debate.
The City of Hill Murray is beautiful this time of year

Bonin2121
Posts: 272
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 3:42 pm

Post by Bonin2121 » Sun Mar 02, 2014 12:02 pm

Cadets16 wrote:People really just amp this whole recruiting issue up because it's hockey - granted this is a hockey forum, and we live in the State of Hockey.
Lol

Nevertoomuchhockey
Posts: 1138
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:59 pm

Post by Nevertoomuchhockey » Sun Mar 02, 2014 12:20 pm

Well that's 10 minutes of my life I can never get back.

HShockeywatcher
Posts: 6848
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:21 pm

Post by HShockeywatcher » Sun Mar 02, 2014 2:29 pm

almostashappy wrote:You threw out the jobs scenario as an obvious strawman, but there are real life examples where (right or wrong) there are similar feelings of betrayal when individuals or companies decide to move on to greener pastures. Just ask LeBron James and the City of Cleveland. Or the City of Baltimore when the Colts fled by night. Or more to the point...to a city or state that offers tax incentives and/or community grants to a fledgling business, only to see that company/factory off-shoring jobs later on.
It's only a strawman if you look at it from the angle you are, which is the "we own the rights to them so they must stay" angle. To your example, I have friends from Ohio who supported LeBron's leaving because the city did nothing to keep him. People expect kids who live in their zone to stay no matter the circumstances.
BlueLineSpecial wrote:I'm a private school guy. And the 'open enrollment exists so all is equal' argument that private school backers use doesn't hold a lot of water to me.

With that all said, kicking privates to their own tourney or continually complaining without offering up actual solutions doesn't accomplish anything either. Maybe it means putting all the privates into one or even two sections? Maybe it means creating a rule that if you transfer to a private after high school and without a physical move in residence you have to sit a year?
Why do you think it doesn't hold water?
Public and private schools are inherently different; private schools have to actively work to constantly improve their product to keep their doors open while public schools simply get who lives in the boundaries. There is very little actively improving their product with the express purpose of attracting more and better students/families.
Hermantown is the example I have used year after year. Without open enrollment for years, they have maintained competitiveness in both academics and athletics. Why is that? It's because they have a great school system and people want to move their to raise their children.
Everything being equal, private schools should be at an inherent disadvantage. If I want to OE Johnny to the neighbor school, it's free. If I want to send Johnny to private school X, it can be a yearly check of $10-20k.
The reason, imo, that it wouldn't hold water is the complacency and blame game attitude many have.

That is the rule now.

chief22
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 12:00 am

Post by chief22 » Sun Mar 02, 2014 3:46 pm

celly93 wrote:While I'm not as familiar with the antics of the STA students, I have a hard time believing that people would be this upset if it was any other school.

From what I've seen, they always seem to be the loudest and most engaged student section. Isn't that a good thing? Obviously being disrespectful isn't good, but I'd rather see a student section have some fun with the other team's mascot than text or sit the entire game. In 2011, the EP student section sat the entire quarterfinal. Do we really want that?
Yes...sit down

observer
Posts: 2225
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:45 pm

Post by observer » Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:20 pm

What a lot of this proves is what we already assumed. We knew the private school transfer players have issues (that's why they transferred) and now we know the parents do too (that's why they transferred their player).

BlueLineSpecial
Posts: 1130
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:42 am
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU!!!!

Post by BlueLineSpecial » Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:25 pm

HShockeywatcher wrote:
almostashappy wrote:You threw out the jobs scenario as an obvious strawman, but there are real life examples where (right or wrong) there are similar feelings of betrayal when individuals or companies decide to move on to greener pastures. Just ask LeBron James and the City of Cleveland. Or the City of Baltimore when the Colts fled by night. Or more to the point...to a city or state that offers tax incentives and/or community grants to a fledgling business, only to see that company/factory off-shoring jobs later on.
It's only a strawman if you look at it from the angle you are, which is the "we own the rights to them so they must stay" angle. To your example, I have friends from Ohio who supported LeBron's leaving because the city did nothing to keep him. People expect kids who live in their zone to stay no matter the circumstances.
BlueLineSpecial wrote:I'm a private school guy. And the 'open enrollment exists so all is equal' argument that private school backers use doesn't hold a lot of water to me.

With that all said, kicking privates to their own tourney or continually complaining without offering up actual solutions doesn't accomplish anything either. Maybe it means putting all the privates into one or even two sections? Maybe it means creating a rule that if you transfer to a private after high school and without a physical move in residence you have to sit a year?
Why do you think it doesn't hold water?
Public and private schools are inherently different; private schools have to actively work to constantly improve their product to keep their doors open while public schools simply get who lives in the boundaries. There is very little actively improving their product with the express purpose of attracting more and better students/families.
Hermantown is the example I have used year after year. Without open enrollment for years, they have maintained competitiveness in both academics and athletics. Why is that? It's because they have a great school system and people want to move their to raise their children.
Everything being equal, private schools should be at an inherent disadvantage. If I want to OE Johnny to the neighbor school, it's free. If I want to send Johnny to private school X, it can be a yearly check of $10-20k.
The reason, imo, that it wouldn't hold water is the complacency and blame game attitude many have.

That is the rule now.
Is it the rule? I was under the impression that if a player at WBL wanted to transfer to Hill they could do that without sitting a year and without an actual residence move. Maybe I'm wrong...

It doesn't hold water to me because I don't think open enrollment for hockey purposes is happening enough to warrant a one-to-one comparison to the advantage private schools have. For the most part, a suburban team has players from that suburb. Yes there are a handful that are open enrolling somewhere else for hockey reasons. I don't see it happening so much though to change the landscape dramatically. If private schools are at such a disadvantage, why do almost all of them have sustainably good hockey programs?

Now, I don't have any problems with high school hockey in MN like so many on this forum do. Gosh if you just read the posts you'd think our product in is the throws of an all-out disaster. Public schools for the most part are the ones winning AA titles. This is the second year out of 4 with no privates. In my opinion things are great. I think public and privates can coexist well.

To not acknowledge that privates have an advantage when putting together a team is a little naive. I get that Hill has advantages there and so I don't get too upset when people attack or celebrate our losses.

Now when what is happening down in Lakeville spreads to other cities, I guess we'll see how people feel
8)
The City of Hill Murray is beautiful this time of year

Nevertoomuchhockey
Posts: 1138
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:59 pm

Post by Nevertoomuchhockey » Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:50 pm

You're wrong. They can only enter as freshmen without sitting or jv.

BlueLineSpecial
Posts: 1130
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:42 am
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU!!!!

Post by BlueLineSpecial » Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:54 pm

Nevertoomuchhockey wrote:You're wrong. They can only enter as freshmen without sitting or jv.
Ah. Thanks.

So, even private to private?
The City of Hill Murray is beautiful this time of year

HShockeywatcher
Posts: 6848
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:21 pm

Post by HShockeywatcher » Sun Mar 02, 2014 5:24 pm

So, to paraphrase, are you saying it isn't comparable because public schools are not taking advantage of better themselves like private schools not because they cannot better themselves?
I wouldn't disagree that many are not, but that doesn't mean they cannot.

By their very nature there are plenty of advantages to being a coach at a private school. Not having to worry about grade issues is a big one I've seen in both situations. But I'm curious what specific advantages relative to hockey you'd be referring to. Most of the specifics I can think of are choices. Which is ultimately what I'm referring to, choices about how you respond (as an institution) to your situation.
When a school, public or private, has certain facilities, those are the choice of someone. Good facilities will attract students that participate in that activity, worse ones will do the opposite, for example.
BlueLineSpecial wrote:
Nevertoomuchhockey wrote:You're wrong. They can only enter as freshmen without sitting or jv.
Ah. Thanks.

So, even private to private?
As far as I understand, [almost] any transfer after 9th grade you sit out regardless of where it's from or where it's to. You live in Mendota, attend St Thomas as a freshman and Sibley as a sophomore you sit.
I say almost because I don't know if there are hardship exceptions anymore; if that same situation happens and the parents lose a job or something and can't afford the private school, they used to be able to move to public with no penalty.

nu2hockey
Posts: 642
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:19 pm

Post by nu2hockey » Sun Mar 02, 2014 5:37 pm

7th,8th or 9th can transfer in and be immediately eligible for varsity competition

public or private
public through open enrollment
private through enrollment

hipcheck
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 10:48 am

so///

Post by hipcheck » Sun Mar 02, 2014 6:15 pm

The THING is...communities that have youth teams take a look at how those teams are doing at their level. Hoping to see a glimmer of hope about a group coming through. Losing a player or two happens, but some teams gain a player or two.

The private schools do not have that luxury of looking at their youth teams, but have the benefit of players developing from other programs.

Nevertoomuchhockey
Posts: 1138
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:59 pm

Post by Nevertoomuchhockey » Sun Mar 02, 2014 11:09 pm

BlueLineSpecial wrote:
Nevertoomuchhockey wrote:You're wrong. They can only enter as freshmen without sitting or jv.
Ah. Thanks.

So, even private to private?
Unless the family physically relocates, which considering the close proximity of so many metro privates and how large an area they draw from anyway, that could be sticky. If you transfer from SPA to CDH and move from Summit to a new house on Randolph, I'm pretty sure your kid would still sit.

HShockeywatcher
Posts: 6848
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:21 pm

Post by HShockeywatcher » Sun Mar 02, 2014 11:19 pm

hipcheck wrote:The THING is...communities that have youth teams take a look at how those teams are doing at their level. Hoping to see a glimmer of hope about a group coming through. Losing a player or two happens, but some teams gain a player or two.

The private schools do not have that luxury of looking at their youth teams, but have the benefit of players developing from other programs.
Everything you said is true, but the issue is that the associations don't technically have a direct connection with the MN State High School League team they "feed."
Isn't playing with your teammates for years and years an advantage?
Isn't taking whoever attends your school and putting them together a disadvantage?
I'm not naive enough to think good players can't adapt and such, but those are real positives/negatives.
Nevertoomuchhockey wrote:Unless the family physically relocates, which considering the close proximity of so many metro privates and how large an area they draw from anyway, that could be sticky. If you transfer from SPA to CDH and move from Summit to a new house on Randolph, I'm pretty sure your kid would still sit.
If they change their address they are fine. By all accounts I've heard they could move down the block, which is why I think that part of it is silly.

Marty
Posts: 205
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:26 pm

Post by Marty » Mon Mar 03, 2014 9:07 am

One year does not make a trend line.

mnmouth
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:06 pm

Post by mnmouth » Mon Mar 03, 2014 9:55 am

HShockeywatcher wrote:Public and private schools are inherently different; private schools have to actively work to constantly improve their product to keep their doors open while public schools simply get who lives in the boundaries. There is very little actively improving their product with the express purpose of attracting more and better students/families . . . Everything being equal, private schools should be at an inherent disadvantage. If I want to OE Johnny to the neighbor school, it's free. If I want to send Johnny to private school X, it can be a yearly check of $10-20k.
The reason, imo, that it wouldn't hold water is the complacency and blame game attitude many have.

That is the rule now.
You could not be more wrong about public schools not constantly working to improve their product. Besides keeping keeping students safe, an administrator's most important job is keep teachers and students making progress in all areas of education.

Obviously you have not paid attention to how many in-service meetings, workshops, professional days and outside service contacts public school teachers must attend/make every year. All this on top of the fact that teachers must work towards a Master's degree and beyond, and constantly accumulate continuing ed credits toward relicensure. All this activity is done exclusively to make the teacher more prepared, better informed, and on the edge of new teaching techniques in material delivery and assessment, so as to continually raise the bar for the school's staff, students and community.

Also, it is not a disadvantage for parents to send their kids to a private school if they can afford it. And it is certainly to a private school teacher's advantage to have smaller class sizes, far less discipline problems then their public school brethren and - on average - sharper and more motivated students in their seats that do not have to worry about meeting or partially meeting state standards.
Last edited by mnmouth on Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

clean ice
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:44 pm

Post by clean ice » Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:01 am

To all the private school haters.... My son went k-8th in private catholic. We had to play in the association where he would go to public high school. The problem is he would not be going to public high school. So why does everyone think that the only good hockey players come out of public schools. Oh ya wouldn't change a thing. See ya on Wednesday night.. :D

HShockeywatcher
Posts: 6848
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:21 pm

Post by HShockeywatcher » Mon Mar 03, 2014 12:00 pm

mnmouth wrote:You could not be more wrong about public schools not constantly working to improve their product. Besides keeping keeping students safe, an administrator's most important job is keep teachers and students making progress in all areas of education.

Obviously you have not paid attention to how many in-service meetings, workshops, professional days and outside service contacts public school teachers must attend/make every year. All this on top of the fact that teachers must work towards a Master's degree and beyond, and constantly accumulate continuing ed credits toward relicensure. All this activity is done exclusively to make the teacher more prepared, better informed, and on the edge of new teaching techniques in material delivery and assessment, so as to continually raise the bar for the school's staff, students and community.

Also, it is not a disadvantage for parents to send their kids to a private school if they can afford it. And it is certainly to a private school teacher's advantage to have smaller class sizes, far less discipline problems then their public school brethren and - on average - sharper and more motivated students in their seats that do not have to worry about meeting or partially meeting state standards.
I am very in tune with the requirements of public school teachers and much of the professional development they go through. There is a difference, though, is staying with the curve and staying ahead of the curve. Which is my point.
If you think that all of that is done only for the reasons you have listed then you are either not very informed on the many meetings and such teachers attend or part of one of the most well run districts around. Cool for you if it is indeed the latter.
I have the utmost respect for those in the profession and everything they do for our children and families. I just don't support the "woe is me" attitude when your community has not made changes others have.

I have also been apart of many conversations with coaches, and heard of others, both where coaches are talking about the future with the expectation that certain younger players will be attending their school to turn it around and where they complain that certain players living in their district decided to go elsewhere. This is specifically what irks me the most. It is the "ownership" of players in your community with no responsibility to make your school somewhere they should want to be.

It is not a disadvantage for the specific family, no, but it is for the school itself. Like I've said numerous times, the advantages in the classroom and such are huge. But to try to say a $10-20k pricetag is an advantage is clearly wrong.

BadgerBob82
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:49 am

Post by BadgerBob82 » Mon Mar 03, 2014 12:12 pm

MSHSL rules for sports should be very simple. If the student doesn't reside within the transportation boundary for the school, they can't play sports.

In other words, a student that drives 40-50 miles to attend a school is not eligible to play sports. Attend whatever school you want for academic reasons, but sports are not included. For the privates this would mean you can't play sports for Hill-Murray if you live in Wisconsin but you can if you live in Woodbury.

The more complex the rules, the more bending and breaking of the rules.

C-dad
Posts: 645
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 12:47 pm

Post by C-dad » Mon Mar 03, 2014 12:16 pm

BadgerBob82 wrote:MSHSL rules for sports should be very simple. If the student doesn't reside within the transportation boundary for the school, they can't play sports.

In other words, a student that drives 40-50 miles to attend a school is not eligible to play sports. Attend whatever school you want for academic reasons, but sports are not included. For the privates this would mean you can't play sports for Hill-Murray if you live in Wisconsin but you can if you live in Woodbury.

The more complex the rules, the more bending and breaking of the rules.
MSHSL would lose the first court case on that one if they tried it. (No, I'm not a lawyer, but I could see that one being challenged and I doubt they could justify it, just cause it'd make you happy.)

mnmouth
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:06 pm

Post by mnmouth » Mon Mar 03, 2014 12:31 pm

HShockeywatcher wrote:
mnmouth wrote:You could not be more wrong about public schools not constantly working to improve their product. Besides keeping keeping students safe, an administrator's most important job is keep teachers and students making progress in all areas of education.

Obviously you have not paid attention to how many in-service meetings, workshops, professional days and outside service contacts public school teachers must attend/make every year. All this on top of the fact that teachers must work towards a Master's degree and beyond, and constantly accumulate continuing ed credits toward relicensure. All this activity is done exclusively to make the teacher more prepared, better informed, and on the edge of new teaching techniques in material delivery and assessment, so as to continually raise the bar for the school's staff, students and community.

Also, it is not a disadvantage for parents to send their kids to a private school if they can afford it. And it is certainly to a private school teacher's advantage to have smaller class sizes, far less discipline problems then their public school brethren and - on average - sharper and more motivated students in their seats that do not have to worry about meeting or partially meeting state standards.
I am very in tune with the requirements of public school teachers and much of the professional development they go through. There is a difference, though, is staying with the curve and staying ahead of the curve. Which is my point.
If you think that all of that is done only for the reasons you have listed then you are either not very informed on the many meetings and such teachers attend or part of one of the most well run districts around. Cool for you if it is indeed the latter.
I have the utmost respect for those in the profession and everything they do for our children and families. I just don't support the "woe is me" attitude when your community has not made changes others have.

I have also been apart of many conversations with coaches, and heard of others, both where coaches are talking about the future with the expectation that certain younger players will be attending their school to turn it around and where they complain that certain players living in their district decided to go elsewhere. This is specifically what irks me the most. It is the "ownership" of players in your community with no responsibility to make your school somewhere they should want to be.

It is not a disadvantage for the specific family, no, but it is for the school itself. Like I've said numerous times, the advantages in the classroom and such are huge. But to try to say a $10-20k pricetag is an advantage is clearly wrong.
That is exactly my point: most public schools are engaging in teacher development precisely to stay ahead of the curve. As a former general ed and special ed teacher, I saw and participated firsthand in these activities. Principals are constantly forwarding websites, videos, literature, etc. to their staffs on how to improve the classroom setting. It is ridiculous and condescending of you to blanket claim that a community/public school takes no responsibility in making it a destination for incoming students. Are you informed on the many reasons why teachers attend these developmental meetings??

I don't know who is claiming a 'woe is me' attitude, but it certainly isn't me. And go back and read my post. I never stated that a $10-20k price tag is an advantage, but I did state that it is not a disadvantage for those families that can afford a private school education for their kids.

Locked