PennStateHoops.com Discussion Forum

More Private - Public School Debate


#1

I have NO trust in the PIAA But…who knows:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11093/1136408-364.stm


#2

The article makes a good point about attendance at the BJC. Attendance the last few years has been about half of what it was the last few years at the Giant Center. But the Giant Center era didn’t include the Philly private schools – who produce VERY weak attendance figures.

I don’t know if it’s fair to automatically bump up all private schools one class. I think it should be based on performance too. If a school dominates its class, bump them up. If they stink, let them go back down. Whatever they do should create a more competitive balance and not just punish all private schools because of boundaries, or lack of boundaries.


#3

I don’t think there’s any doubt that parochial schools recruit, and that is an advantage. But there’s a way to simple way to solve it-school choice. Let kids go where ever they want and have the money follow them. Solves it. Without having to worry about paying for school, parochial schools would have the top 10 spots in the state, in every state, IMO. Parents, including those of sports stars, want a safer, better academic environment for their kids.

On a related note, sadly, due to financial pressures, Rice HS in Harlem, alma mater of Kemba Walker, Lamont Jones, Curtis Kelley and Durand Scott, who played together, is closing. Despite charging less than half of what NYC public schools receive per child, and getting better academic results and graduation records than the average NYC HS, parents couldn’t come up with it during these times, certainly not when they’re also subsidizing public schools. Anybody else for ending the monopoly?


#4

[quote=“kidcoyote, post:3, topic:2299”]I don’t think there’s any doubt that parochial schools recruit, and that is an advantage. But there’s a way to simple way to solve it-school choice. Let kids go where ever they want and have the money follow them. Solves it. Without having to worry about paying for school, parochial schools would have the top 10 spots in the state, in every state, IMO. Parents, including those of sports stars, want a safer, better academic environment for their kids.

On a related note, sadly, due to financial pressures, Rice HS in Harlem, alma mater of Kemba Walker, Lamont Jones, Curtis Kelley and Durand Scott, who played together, is closing. Despite charging less than half of what NYC public schools receive per child, and getting better academic results and graduation records than the average NYC HS, parents couldn’t come up with it during these times, certainly not when they’re also subsidizing public schools. Anybody else for ending the monopoly?[/quote]

Does Rice have to teach special education children? Special needs children? Continue to school kids with disciplinary problems? In Pennsylvania, public schools even provide the transportation to private schools.

Does Rice get a subsidy from its government, the RC Church?

When the rules are the same for all, of course I am for breaking it up and allowing choice.

My daughter is fortunate enough to attend a school that charges many times the amount spent for public school kids. In first grade, she had a classmate who was something of a bully. Nothing out of the ordinary, just a trifle physical and big for his age. On the second incident, he became the taxpayers’ problem at the school one block away. The taxpayers did not have the same option.

The special ed and special needs requirement is not a small matter, either, in terms of its effect on cost per student.


#5

Tim, again I agree with your points… I have seen local Catholic schools tout their low cost per student ratio, but it ignores many of these high-cost special needs cases that many of the private schools don’t have to burden.

I’ve always favored school choice, excluding the cost of busing. If you want to send your kids to the public school next door, it should be your responsibility to get them there.

Now, to get back to the topic at hand… Our local school district just got bumped from AA to AAA by only about 10 kids. We were very competitive in AA but we’re going to get crushed in AAA. With all of the charter schools with their smaller enrollment filling the lower divisions, it’s almost creating a 2-tiered system where only the very smallest schools are in anything lower than AAA. Therefore, we’re grouping the majority of public schools into 2 classes while all the charter schools are in the lower 2. This really puts the small public schools left in A and AA at a big disadvantage, since the charter schools can draw from a much larger population base and they tend to attract more “active” kids (meaning you’re going to get more athletes, musicians, etc per enrollment).

Therefore, you’re hutting the schools like ours that are now part of a larger grouping of schools with which they are forced to compete, and you’re hurting the small public schools by making their classes much more competitive as well.

Therefore, I agree with using a different classification scale for Charter/etc schools, although I don’t know if this particular proposal is the way to go. Maybe we should also look at adding another classification, if the total number of schools keeps rising.


#6

[quote=“MarkH, post:5, topic:2299”]Tim, again I agree with your points… I have seen local Catholic schools tout their low cost per student ratio, but it ignores many of these high-cost special needs cases that many of the private schools don’t have to burden.

I’ve always favored school choice, excluding the cost of busing. If you want to send your kids to the public school next door, it should be your responsibility to get them there.

Now, to get back to the topic at hand… Our local school district just got bumped from AA to AAA by only about 10 kids. We were very competitive in AA but we’re going to get crushed in AAA. With all of the charter schools with their smaller enrollment filling the lower divisions, it’s almost creating a 2-tiered system where only the very smallest schools are in anything lower than AAA. Therefore, we’re grouping the majority of public schools into 2 classes while all the charter schools are in the lower 2. This really puts the small public schools left in A and AA at a big disadvantage, since the charter schools can draw from a much larger population base and they tend to attract more “active” kids (meaning you’re going to get more athletes, musicians, etc per enrollment).

Therefore, you’re hutting the schools like ours that are now part of a larger grouping of schools with which they are forced to compete, and you’re hurting the small public schools by making their classes much more competitive as well.

Therefore, I agree with using a different classification scale for Charter/etc schools, although I don’t know if this particular proposal is the way to go. Maybe we should also look at adding another classification, if the total number of schools keeps rising.[/quote]

GREAT post Mark…I agree with your “topic at hand” commends. BUT, you did not mention one issue. These Charter/Private schools…RECRUIT. I think something needs to be done. BUT, I don’t think I will see much chance in my lifetime. I don’t believe the PIAA will take strong action!!
As for the general education issue…I don’t see change in PA. Can’t say about other states. Remember in PA when property taxes were to be ended or greatly reduced…YA right! Let’s see what we do in PA. PA already makes huge money on Lotto. Already makes huge money on casinos. How about reducing the state budget…by 30% and NOT 3%…and start with the general assembly!


#7

Comment from penn-live:

http://blog.pennlive.com/pasports/2011/04/piaa_private_school_recruiting.html


#8

Other states have separate state tournaments for private schools, why not follow the same model? At the end they have a tournament of champions with all schools competing regardless of size. Works for me.


#9

Me 2!


#10

Just different state touraments for me! I don’t see the need for a tourament of champions. This would be WAY TOO MUCH. There are too many “play-off” games already; with sections… THEN states!!


#11

[quote=“MarkH, post:5, topic:2299”]Tim, again I agree with your points… I have seen local Catholic schools tout their low cost per student ratio, but it ignores many of these high-cost special needs cases that many of the private schools don’t have to burden.

I’ve always favored school choice, excluding the cost of busing. If you want to send your kids to the public school next door, it should be your responsibility to get them there.

Now, to get back to the topic at hand… Our local school district just got bumped from AA to AAA by only about 10 kids. We were very competitive in AA but we’re going to get crushed in AAA. With all of the charter schools with their smaller enrollment filling the lower divisions, it’s almost creating a 2-tiered system where only the very smallest schools are in anything lower than AAA. Therefore, we’re grouping the majority of public schools into 2 classes while all the charter schools are in the lower 2. This really puts the small public schools left in A and AA at a big disadvantage, since the charter schools can draw from a much larger population base and they tend to attract more “active” kids (meaning you’re going to get more athletes, musicians, etc per enrollment).

Therefore, you’re hutting the schools like ours that are now part of a larger grouping of schools with which they are forced to compete, and you’re hurting the small public schools by making their classes much more competitive as well.

Therefore, I agree with using a different classification scale for Charter/etc schools, although I don’t know if this particular proposal is the way to go. Maybe we should also look at adding another classification, if the total number of schools keeps rising.[/quote]

Our single A baseball team is coming to your smallish AAA school next week. You’ll have your chance to beat up on someone closer to your own size. :wink:

New classifications will not help us too much, because we don’t seem to have the desire or opportunity to schedule schools our own size. It gets real discouraging for our guys to constantly face AAA schools. We managed to knock one off yesterday, but that is a rare occasion. I’m pretty sure the last three games against your school were all mercy rule victories for you.

Part of the problem is the small private schools only seem to schedule each other. And with budgets the way they are a long trip to an away game just to play someone our own size isn’t going to happen.


#12
[quote="kidcoyote, post:3, topic:2299"]I don't think there's any doubt that parochial schools recruit, and that is an advantage. But there's a way to simple way to solve it-school choice. Let kids go where ever they want and have the money follow them. Solves it. Without having to worry about paying for school, parochial schools would have the top 10 spots in the state, in every state, IMO. Parents, including those of sports stars, want a safer, better academic environment for their kids.

On a related note, sadly, due to financial pressures, Rice HS in Harlem, alma mater of Kemba Walker, Lamont Jones, Curtis Kelley and Durand Scott, who played together, is closing. Despite charging less than half of what NYC public schools receive per child, and getting better academic results and graduation records than the average NYC HS, parents couldn’t come up with it during these times, certainly not when they’re also subsidizing public schools. Anybody else for ending the monopoly?[/quote]

Does Rice have to teach special education children? Special needs children? Continue to school kids with disciplinary problems? In Pennsylvania, public schools even provide the transportation to private schools.

Does Rice get a subsidy from its government, the RC Church?

When the rules are the same for all, of course I am for breaking it up and allowing choice.

My daughter is fortunate enough to attend a school that charges many times the amount spent for public school kids. In first grade, she had a classmate who was something of a bully. Nothing out of the ordinary, just a trifle physical and big for his age. On the second incident, he became the taxpayers’ problem at the school one block away. The taxpayers did not have the same option.

The special ed and special needs requirement is not a small matter, either, in terms of its effect on cost per student.

Make the rules the same for all. Better yet, have school choice and open it for all. Stop the tenure, let both public and private schools fail if they’re not getting it done. Regarding handling tougher kids/situations, the private schools can and often do, provide a better education. I’m just for choice Tim. Re the problems at public schools vs. private, talking points not necessarily supported by evidence…at least not in this experiment noted below. Not sure why so many cling to a system which fails so many kids.

Milton Friedman - School Choice


#13

I’m for changing the classification of private school and marrying them back to PIAA.

Why not give it a chance to see how it works? Doesn’t sound like too bad of an idea.


#14
Other states have separate state tournaments for private schools, why not follow the same model? At the end they have a tournament of champions with all schools competing regardless of size. Works for me.

I’m for changing the classification of private school and marrying them back to PIAA.

Why not give it a chance to see how it works? Doesn’t sound like too bad of an idea.

billtown, you’re absolutely correct. What bothers me about this is that the public schools have guaranteed funding, while private schools nationally are being squeezed. So, IMO, the public school coaches have a legit beef, but they’re not looking at the whole picture, and would hardly go for an even playing field. Why not provide vouchers to all students, not schools, and let the schools all recruit and the students choose?

Milton Friedman - Educational Vouchers


#15

Kid, please explain to me what makes vouchers better than the system we have now? I’m a conservative, so I guess I’m supposed to be for it. But I don’t understand how having school districts compete for kids (voucher money) is a good thing. Shouldn’t we try other ideas first? I think we should try consolidating school districts. Perhaps not as much as Rendell suggested. But enough to see if it helps cut costs. A big change I’d like to see is voters being able to give a thumbs up or down to teacher contracts. That would go a long way toward eliminating the advantage the unions have gained by getting so many teachers on school boards. And voters would get the ultimate say in how much money we pay instead of having it decided for us. I’d like to hear some other ideas too. Vouchers just seems like an extreme measure that has too much potential for disaster if you ask me.


#16

I say why limit this idea of paying teachers based on test scores, and giving tax payers the right to vote on teachers’ salaries, and choice… let’s expand these good ideas…

Let’s pay those servants of the community, our police officers, based on the crime rate: crime rate goes up, their pay goes down. And give us tax payers the right to limit their pay if we don’t like their job performance. And even more, let’s give the good citizen’s some choice in who protects them… if the police are better equipped to fight crime in the town a few miles down the road, why can’t I call them to come enforce the laws in my neighborhood?

I tell ya, performance based pay makes sense to me, as well as no unions, and lots of free choice. Let’s expand these good ideas!
:wink:


#17

[quote=“LarryH, post:16, topic:2299”]I say why limit this idea of paying teachers based on test scores, and giving tax payers the right to vote on teachers’ salaries, and choice… let’s expand these good ideas…

Let’s pay those servants of the community, our police officers, based on the crime rate: crime rate goes up, their pay goes down. And give us tax payers the right to limit their pay if we don’t like their job performance. And even more, let’s give the good citizen’s some choice in who protects them… if the police are better equipped to fight crime in the town a few miles down the road, why can’t I call them to come enforce the laws in my neighborhood?

I tell ya, performance based pay makes sense to me, as well as no unions, and lots of free choice. Let’s expand these good ideas!
;)[/quote]

You probably didn’t come up with that example by yourself, but let me give you another.

Let’s say that someone decides to open a private fire department service. They set uptheir own phone number (say 811 instead of 911). The community company usually take 45 minutes to respond, but the pricvate one takes 10 minutes.

One day your house is on fire. Who do you call. After you get the bill for the private company, you naturally wonder, "why can’t the community department to it cheaper and get better response times)?

We, as Americans, usually take pride in our free market society. We say that competition makes up more efficient, yet some of our most important services are government departments that have no competition, and no REAL motivation to be efficient.


#18

Why is schools competing for kids a good thing? I can’t improve on what Friedman states. You don’t agree with him? Do you go to a restaurant which serves bad food? Why should you have to go to a school which has a lousy record? Think about two places you have to use that are monopolies, the Post Office and the DMV. How’s your experience been there? Who wants your business more. Who serves you better? BTW, FedEx planes transport US Post Office mail. So the PO is really a front, an expensive one at that. They can’t complete mail delivery without FedEx. School vouchers would open up all to recruitment, a totally level playing field, and parents could best pick the schools best for their kids, on their criteria, not some system developed by bureaucrats defined by geography. You think the public school coaches want that? Or do they just want to keep the advantages they have, and remove advantages private schools have?


#19
I say why limit this idea of paying teachers based on test scores, and giving tax payers the right to vote on teachers’ salaries, and choice… let’s expand these good ideas…

Let’s pay those servants of the community, our police officers, based on the crime rate: crime rate goes up, their pay goes down. And give us tax payers the right to limit their pay if we don’t like their job performance. And even more, let’s give the good citizen’s some choice in who protects them… if the police are better equipped to fight crime in the town a few miles down the road, why can’t I call them to come enforce the laws in my neighborhood?

I tell ya, performance based pay makes sense to me, as well as no unions, and lots of free choice. Let’s expand these good ideas!
:wink:

You probably didn’t come up with that example by yourself,

???


#20
Kid, please explain to me what makes vouchers better than the system we have now? I'm a conservative, so I guess I'm supposed to be for it. But I don't understand how having school districts compete for kids (voucher money) is a good thing. Shouldn't we try other ideas first? I think we should try consolidating school districts. Perhaps not as much as Rendell suggested. But enough to see if it helps cut costs. A big change I'd like to see is voters being able to give a thumbs up or down to teacher contracts. That would go a long way toward eliminating the advantage the unions have gained by getting so many teachers on school boards. And voters would get the ultimate say in how much money we pay instead of having it decided for us. I'd like to hear some other ideas too. Vouchers just seems like an extreme measure that has too much potential for disaster if you ask me.

Why is schools competing for kids a good thing? I can’t improve on what Friedman states. You don’t agree with him? Do you go to a restaurant which serves bad food? Why should you have to go to a school which has a lousy record? Think about two places you have to use that are monopolies, the Post Office and the DMV. How’s your experience been there? Who wants your business more. Who serves you better? BTW, FedEx planes transport US Post Office mail. So the PO is really a front, an expensive one at that. They can’t complete mail delivery without FedEx. School vouchers would open up all to recruitment, a totally level playing field, and parents could best pick the schools best for their kids, on their criteria, not some system developed by bureaucrats defined by geography. You think the public school coaches want that? Or do they just want to keep the advantages they have, and remove advantages private schools have?

The Post Office and FEDEX are not playing on level playing fields. If starting tomorrow, FEDEX had to drive by and stop at every residence and business in the US, instead of just those that are getting deliveries and scheduling pick ups, what would happen to their profitability? And the Post office does deliveries for FEDEX too in some cases.