Open Enrollment Solved!

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 10:17 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> If you go to the MN Education site and read up on OE you will find there is no mention of either academics or athletics or for that matter, nothing about any requirement for a reason to transfer. You will also find that 30,000 students transferred using OE last year. Many communites offer a way to transfer from another school district without using OE. There is nothing in the MSHSL documents that talk about reaons for transfer either. If you check the actual statutes regarding OE there is no mention of reasons for transfer. So where does all this questioning of transfer reasons come from?<hr></blockquote> No, that wasn't my point. I already know there isn't a transfer requirement. Not because I read it, but because I'm not really convinced and/or already know you cannot create some type of stipulations in writing saying such athletically. Creating more rules/regulations for anything isn't a good idea let alone kids. Athletic transfers are generally only important to the purist sports fan. It's something that needs to be taught in the home as a part of athletic values. Not forcing people to do it. If it is unfortunate for the sake of high school hockey, then so be it. But not when it goes against the wishes of the player, and naturally, freedom to choose. My whole point earlier was how would you even go about creating some type of rule on transferring? I'm not sure it's practical because of all the legal binds the league/Dept. of Education could face telling who and who cannot go where. It's what I meant by someone claiming "discrimination". BTW, what is the difference between transfer and OE? "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 7:27 am

I don't think there is a diffference between transfer and OE in the scope of this discussion. A transfer really means you started at one HS and moved to another. Some people seem to distinquish between transferring via OE vs transferring your residence/guardian. There are many ways to do a residence change just for sports as well. Several years ago I know a girl actually moved from St Louis to play hockey at Jefferson. They had the money to rent an apartment here. Other tricks are to use relatives addresses. I think one thing OE did was to allow the common person the ability to chose a school without resorting to such tricks. It's been going on in sports for a long time. It's not true that tranferring or moving is something only "purist" sports fans do. I could name a dozen people I know of that are mid level support players that moved schools and sports was a factor. People never count all the kids that move programs going into 9th grade either because the MSHSL doesn't count that as a transfer. I don't see where not transferring is a virtue that needs to be taught in the home. If you mean that sticking it out through tough times is a virtue I agree but I can also name many transfers that have that "tough it out" virtue so the 2 are not neccessarily related. If your point is transferring shows a lack of community I guess I agree. If I lived in Hibbing or Grand Rapids I think community is a great virtue, one we in the metro area are lacking, but that is the state of big city life and huge schools. One of the chief selling points private schools make is they provide the "community" missing in many of our large schools. Whatever school you go to you should be able to play sports for the same reasons that playing sports are good for students. It's the playing that's important and the kids should be punished because they aren't "homegrown". Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... xk1>xk1</A> at: 3/4/06 7:37 am

FACMAN · Post by **FACMAN** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 9:32 am

OE is obviously a controversial and hot button issue. There are many interesting comment and proposals on this thread. OE to get noticed: I don't believe it is a large factor. IMO most D1 caliber players will get noticed, wherever they are. There's so much hockey besides HS hockey going on, as well. NDP type players certainly don't have to OE to get noticed. Mid level players are helped a lot by HS coaches that promote, but I doubt many kids OE to a particular school because the coach is a good promoter. College coaches say transfers lack committment: I'm very surprised by this one. College coaches need good student/athletes to keep their jobs. If a coach had the chance to land a very good student who is an excellent OE player, I doubt the OE part would affect their decsion in the least. A play for where you are from State tourney? So, a kid transfers, plays the entire season, and then goes back to their home school for the post season? Who does that serve? It's disruptive and impractical for both schools. Will the MSHSL organize and fund all this new "stuff"? Listing OE kids on rosters: Go for it. The vast majority of observers of any given conference or section already know who they are. It sounds more like a scarlet letter type of thing. If you transfer, you can't play sports: Now there's a rule that will last for all of an hour, or so. Are there any good athletic reasons for OEing? If you hate the home school coach, is that a good reason for leaving? Overall, families do what they think is best and right for them. Their reasons and motivations are varied, personal, and highly subjective. All of the items above were listed to make this point: It is very difficult to deal with subjective issues by providing subjective solutions. IMO if you are anti OE, there's only a couple of objective choices. You can eliminate OE (probably won't happen), or slow athletically motivated OE by imposing the year long sit out rule (could very well happen).

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 11:02 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>It's not true that tranferring or moving is something only "purist" sports fans do.<hr></blockquote> It is a "purist" ideal. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>I don't see where not transferring is a virtue that needs to be taught in the home. If you mean that sticking it out through tough times is a virtue I agree but I can also name many transfers that have that "tough it out" virtue so the 2 are not neccessarily related. If your point is transferring shows a lack of community I guess I agree. If I lived in Hibbing or Grand Rapids I think community is a great virtue, one we in the metro area are lacking, but that is the state of big city life and huge schools. One of the chief selling points private schools make is they provide the "community" missing in many of our large schools.<hr></blockquote> If people at this message board do not like how transferring degrades the quality of the game, the answer isn't creating more rules and regulations to prevent students doing so. That is the students freedom to choose. Forcing them to stop by creating said stipulations isn't the answer because it takes away from their freedom. I'm talking about two seperate things here. One is about political freedom. The other a purist outlook on the game. I'm saying I cannot satisfy the purist with no transferring at the cost of giving up the students personal freedom to choose for themselves. It stinks, but this is where athletic values come into play in the home. The true way to change transfer behaviors. Not more rules at the cost of losing individual freedom. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Whatever school you go to you should be able to play sports for the same reasons that playing sports are good for students. It's the playing that's important and the kids should be punished because they aren't "homegrown".<hr></blockquote> Again, punishing them through more rules and regulations. If the transfer isn't welcome in said community, they will make it very clear to them. You change outlooks through taught values, not creating more rules which usually equates to spending more money. As a taxpayer, I'd rather not. "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 11:41 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>College coaches say transfers lack committment: I'm very surprised by this one. College coaches need good student/athletes to keep their jobs. If a coach had the chance to land a very good student who is an excellent OE player, I doubt the OE part would affect their decsion in the least.<hr></blockquote> *DING DING DING* We have a winner here! It is the decision and freedom of the said program to choose if they allow transfers. It isn't my business to dictate to them with rules on what they should do. If coaches and programs are allowing it, there isn't much the purist can do about it. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>If you transfer, you can't play sports: Now there's a rule that will last for all of an hour, or so.<hr></blockquote> My point exactly. It was an example to show just how impossible putting some type of rule into play would work at deterring transferring. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Are there any good athletic reasons for OEing? If you hate the home school coach, is that a good reason for leaving? Overall, families do what they think is best and right for them. Their reasons and motivations are varied, personal, and highly subjective. All of the items above were listed to make this point: It is very difficult to deal with subjective issues by providing subjective solutions.<hr></blockquote> Because it is their values and right to choose. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>IMO if you are anti OE, there's only a couple of objective choices. You can eliminate OE (probably won't happen), or slow athletically motivated OE by imposing the year long sit out rule (could very well happen).<hr></blockquote> This is "objective"? It's like saying, 'My values are best. Therefore I should be able to tell you the student, family, coach, and program what to do.' You cannot eliminate OE because the athletic/academic line is too blurred. "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 12:50 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>or slow athletically motivated OE by imposing the year long sit out rule (could very well happen).<hr></blockquote> Too difficult to impose. I still think your better off zeroxing however many copies off to all the coaches in the state explaining the decline of hockey through transfers. Their job in turn would be to inform the parents and students. IMO it is the failure of the league, coaches, parents, and students for allowing this to escalate into what it has become. If they wanted it to have never happened, they shouldn't have allowed it in the first place. Trying to set up rules now is impractical in this day and age for the reasons already state. And IMO it is a violation of their individual right to choose. I respect your views though nonetheless. "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 12:57 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> There will never be any true agreement on what to do about OE and transfers. I think the current rules are a good and workable compromise. If stricter rules are needed they should come at the school district level like Eagan did.<hr></blockquote> This is a great point you made earlier. I believe it should be up to each individual school or district to decide. Not the state or necessarily the MSHSL. It gives the locale the right to decide for themselves without some entity looking over them telling them what to do. "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

FACMAN · Post by **FACMAN** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:52 pm

Nerd, Maybe I used the word objective wrong and I am not a big rules guy either. I said objective because a standard rule for everyone takes all opinions out of the equation. If you OE, you can't play sports for a year. I am not in any way a proponent of that, but am just suggesting to those who want to control athletic OE there can't be any gray areas (not subjective, therefore objective). At any rate, I understand your values approach but attending a school, whether it's through OE or not, includes the right to extra curricular activities. I have a hard time seeing coaches or ADs discouraging kids who are considering their school for OE. "Yeah, attend our school, just don't come out for the hockey team." Or "you are better off staying home, we don't want any OEs on our team". The lawsuits will be flying. You say they should't have allowed it in the first place. They didn't have any choice. Again, school attendance provides rights to EC activities. Finally, you talk about an across the board rule being too difficult. There's one in place already that makes a kid sit out 1/2 the season after their second transfer. They make that work. Let me know if I've missed your point somewhere along the line.

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 3:56 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>You say they should't have allowed it in the first place. They didn't have any choice. Again, school attendance provides rights to EC activities.<hr></blockquote> Exactly. There is a demand for transfers. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>At any rate, I understand your values approach but attending a school, whether it's through OE or not, includes the right to extra curricular activities. I have a hard time seeing coaches or ADs discouraging kids who are considering their school for OE. "Yeah, attend our school, just don't come out for the hockey team." Or "you are better off staying home, we don't want any OEs on our team". The lawsuits will be flying.<hr></blockquote> The last sentence being the operative. When it comes to money, the moral right and wrong of transferring takes a backseat. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>You say they should't have allowed it in the first place. They didn't have any choice. Again, school attendance provides rights to EC activities.<hr></blockquote> I know. I'm saying the hockey community at large is somewhat responsible for not instilling those values and continued upkeep of them through the years. You either think we failed in those values due to the current state of the game, or possibly think we did pretty good considering only, what, 5 percent of students transfer as an overall student body. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Finally, you talk about an across the board rule being too difficult. There's one in place already that makes a kid sit out 1/2 the season after their second transfer. They make that work. Let me know if I've missed your point somewhere along the line.<hr></blockquote> I just talked with a much more intelligent libertarian friend of mine. His ideal would be to gut the entire public school system and let students enroll wherever they want and for whatever reason they want. Too extreme? Well, so I told him I needed an intermediate answer considering it would take some time to dismantle public schools structure. He favored, though grudgingly with his ideals, to let the decisions be made on a district level as opposed to anything that governs a body. Really, let the individual schools decide. In essence, I don't even necessarily agree there should be punishment for a second transfer. The school should decide if they will allow the transferee. "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 2:36 pm

Is there anyone out there with a differing viewpoint? My friend and I have similar libertarian values, so the thought of creating more rules isn't attractive. However, he doesn't have any experience in hockey, and hopefully that is where I am drawing the line. His answer for the sake of the fathers who wrote the constitution is individual liberty (and namely individual freedom) triumph. So I'm probably working too hard on this here, but instead of the MSHSL dictating what each school can do, let each make their own rules. If schools accept multiple transfers, then let them be responsible if you will for degrading the quality of athletics in high school. Schools that do not will have to consider in advance the possibility they will not be as competitive. The other end of this is will chaos occur if their is no governing rule on HS play? My friend's libertarian beliefs make me wonder if he doesn't approve of the league or it's governing rule, maybe it is he who should create his own athletics league with his own set of rules (or lack thereof) and freedom. Not gutting something for the sake of fulfilling his values. "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:39 pm

If you took the Libertarian route, the one transfer rule I would keep is the one that makes you sit out if you transfer during the school year.

norconboy · Post by **norconboy** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 3:28 pm

XK1 go back to the mn edc site and read the regs it clearly states that the OE application must state the acadamic or other reason for the transfer. Its a sticky wicket for the parents of the OE's that are transfering for sports ...I bet academic reasons is on most applications. What is that teaching our children?

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 3:50 pm

This is what it says on the form "Reason for Request: (This does not affect your acceptance)" So you can actually put down that "We want to hose over our current school and join a group superstar hockey players to go undefeated on our way to state even though my new school offers a worse education" and it doesn't matter. "or other" implies to me that sports are just dandy as a reason doesn't it? Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... xk1>xk1</A> at: 3/6/06 3:53 pm

norconboy · Post by **norconboy** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:06 pm

It does at least require that a reason is given and I'll bet sports is not used because the district has to approve the OE application. It puts parents into a postion of having to lie to get what they want and include there children in the lie.

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:19 pm

You might think that people don't mention sports but they do. I'm sure it's rare that a school offers an academic specialty that your current school doesn't. On the other hand, the new school may just offer higher a more challenging classroom situation better geared to get your child ready for college. They really don't deny people a transfer as long as they have openings and I believe it's on a first come first serve basis. What they are looking for are special needs that the school can't meet when they review the form.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:22 pm

I am now wondering if years ago I HAD to go "interview" with the school I was going to OE to, or if this was something that I initiated. I distinctly recall sitting down with principals of more than a few schools. Many schools filled quickly (as early as Dec or Jan) for the next year. I remember looking at WBL, Stillwater, Tartan, etc. at that time. Times have changed now I'm sure, but it seems to me that this stuff was watched closer years ago when it first started. What we should really do is open all the boundaries up and just let kids go anywhere they want - isn't this what we're already doing with OE??? This would/does force competition and accountability on the public schools as far as attracting students from other areas. Essentially this is what SSP does education wise already. They've raised the bar as far as what they have to offer, and they see many transfers in as a result. I would think that similar efforts by multiple public schools would be a good thing. We've seen the benifit of this in the Mpls/St. Paul Public schools over the last 10-20 years. St. Paul Central for example has become an outstanding academic institution, and this is far different from the way it was not so long ago from what I hear??? I also believe that St. Paul allows kids to "pick" their school now or essentially can open enroll within the district with transportation provided??? How we handle the athletic part is more tricky. What we have is a sport that is community based all the way up, and then when we get to HS that all changes due to privates, OE, etc. So, we have a group that believes that kids should play at their home area school (like youth). We have another group that believes that kids should be able to play wherever they want as long as they go to school there (like AAA/HS). What's really happening is that there is no way to make both sides happy. I proposed a "home area" and "HS/AAA" tourney as a "modest proposal" of sorts. It will never happen. What I guess I would really like to see is teams that are huge OE or private hockey powers opt out to AAA/MWEHL play like SSM has done. That's where those kids belong anyway in many respects competition wise. They could get more games, etc. and leave the MSHSL. It would be just like the old private school tourney situations that weren't MSHSL sanctioned events I don't believe years ago??? I'd even still allow these teams that leave the chance to play MSHSL teams. It woudl be the best of both worlds. They could compete for AAA State, Nationals, etc. too with their current teams. They could start in Sept when school starts, and play through the end of school if they wanted. They could put on their own MN state tourney at the end of the year, or just let the U19 State that WHAM & MN Hockey conduct be the State. They would compete against T-Breds and SSM there too. Then, the rest of the teams that don't choose to do this could play MSHSL A or AA, or even tiers, as maybe that's really what is more fair, to have the best/top half teams in AA no matter their size, and the bottom half teams in A. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... ckeyfan</A> at: 3/6/06 4:38 pm

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:48 pm

It's important todo due diligence on any school your child attends, including you resident school district. Some do, some don't. My original point was that there is no "academic" only requirement in the law. The point he was trying to make is that OE players lie on their form and that's what is bad. My guess is the kids don't even read the form, the parents just ask them to sign it. In any case, in my limited sample of OEers, I believe sports were at least mentioned although certainly not as the most important reason.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 8:16 pm

The #1 reason that my suggestion won't happen is that private and OE teams would prefer to chase the mytical "state" tourney - the MSHSL tourney - that's played in one of the greatest venues in N America for hockey. But, they'd alos probably like to chase a national and AAA championship too and play almost year round (they legitimately could as the rules wouldn't prohibit them from doing so...)... Tough choice, eh? Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... ckeyfan</A> at: 3/6/06 8:17 pm

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 8:22 pm

I should add that the first school to make this leap - to AAA - will likely get many transfers as the kids could play year round, play AAA level hockey, still get the HS experience, compete for the U19 State and National title, etc. It would seem logical that the first school to do so would be another private like SSM. I can't see a public school doing so, but, you never know...

Nostalgic Nerd · Post by **Nostalgic Nerd** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:50 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>St. Paul Central for example has become an outstanding academic institution, and this is far different from the way it was not so long ago from what I hear???<hr></blockquote> Academically I'm not sure. They were a huge power in basketball at one time. "Dream as if you'll live forever; Live as if you'll die today." --James Dean

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:05 am

Central's academics are very stellar in the IB program I believe. This was one of the schools that had kids in part of a co-op team I coached, and I had a sister that went there, etc. Very good school.

Betweenthepipes66 · Post by **Betweenthepipes66** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:37 am

I don't belive in OE but I really think the reasons are all selfish when it is done. What about the kids it hurts in the program they OE to? The spot or position it takes away from an up and coming player weather that child would be a super star or not how would anyone know because the attention is all focused on the OE'er. Age seems to be a huge factor in putting these players first, so the kid who is younger that works hard and really there for there team as a true team player gets shoved in the back!! I think its very wrong. I don't belive you should get a freebe, all OE's (because lets face it for academics whatever) should have to sit or be put on JV for the year!!! I'll bet you it wouldn't happen as much or often if super star Susie or Sam would have to think about that! JMO right or wrong :O)

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:34 am

There is something to be said about paying dues, the impact that transfers have on both the program they are leaving and going to, etc. One thing that I think is tough esp. re: G HS Hockey is that in the best/deepest programs ONLY is it like the boys. Meaning, player depth wise, you will see a ton of kids competing for a spot, less & less stellar young kids being the V caliber players, etc. When an OE player comes in, it creates a more boys HS like environment in the program. There are more kids at the top to compete, and it does have a domino effect on the rest of the program, HS to mites. For every spot taken at the top, there coresponds a shocl wave that resonates to the JV/U19/U16-U14-U12-U10-U8 levels possibly. Maybe what could happen is that a HS could choose to field an AAA team and a HS team. Let the AAA team be made up of all the OE kids, best players, etc. The HS team could be the homegrown players. Let the AAA play in the MWEHL, let the HS play in the MSHSL. But, then, if it is a true AAA, it really wouldn't need to be based at one HS, or have participation tied to any specific school. The problem is that if an AAA team isn't affiliated with a school, then it would have a hard case to be made as far as playing MSHSL teams too - as SSM could/can/does allow for. This is why I assume we don't see the TB team playing MSHSL teams, but that may be for the fact that they don't feel the competition warrants it either - although I would say that some of the top HS teams can play with the SSM & TB teams.

hockeyfinatic · Post by **hockeyfinatic** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:56 am

Everybody should stop trying to find a resolution - there isn't one. What we need to do is continue to call out the teams that have OE players and then give all the credit to the teams that don't. Believe me it would effect the coaches/players when they win the state championship if nobody congratulated them or gave them the time of day. Just my toughts! Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... finatic</A> at: 3/7/06 12:30 pm

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 12:36 pm

When you consider the options, the best one may be the one that is already in place. No agreement is ever likely perfect for all parties involved, but it could be a lot worse! All it will take is one school/association to choose to field an AAA like HS team. Once this happens, it will greatly hurt the MSHSL true HS teams in that such an AAA team will attract the best players. I think that this is the fear for many that understand what the fallout would be from this sort of move. It would signify the move from MSHSL "community" based athletics that compete for a school championship, to an "AAA" based setup where you compete for U19 State with the TB & SSM teams for a shot at nationals. If one or more of these AAA teams started to compete against the TB & SSM teams, it woudl destroy MSHSL HS hockey as we know it. The MSHSL game would become what HS Soccer, Gymnastics, etc. is like - but worse I believe.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Open Enrollment Solved!

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

OE

Re: Open Enrollment Solved!

Re: Open Enrollment Solved!

Re: Open Enrollment Solved!

Re: Open Enrollment Solved!

OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved

Re: OE Solved