Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Should home-schooled students be allowed to play high school football?
#11
Here's a reason why not:

The state recompenses schools for the number of students who are attending classes, not those who participate in extra-curricular events. Sports programs are very--sometimes ruinously--expensive. Why should a school be forced to take a home-schooled child and not receive any state money for doing so?

The slippery-slope is also an issue. What certification that a child is actually being home schooled? In a lot of Virginia cities--Richmond, Petersburg, Roanoke, Newport News, etc.--most children who fail do so for attendance reasons. Why not keep your kid in the athletics program he loves, and simply say he's being home-schooled? What's the rationale for keeping the home-schooled from other extra-curriculars: band and theater appear to be exempted from the bill, but why?
Reply
#12
The Virginia bill allows districts to charge the home-schoolers fees to participate, or to opt out altogether.

The state has to decide how it will measure academic performance of home-schooled students; Washington requires that they take standardized tests yearly.

I'm under the impression that the VA bill deals only with sports, not other extra-curriculars. There isn't any info about that in the WaPo article.

Sometimes performing arts participation requires that a student attend a certain class during the day, not just after school practices. Our district allows students to participate in band and theater if they try out and can perform at a level satisfactory to the director without benefit of the classes at school, or they can attend just that class and no others.
I think it benefits both the students and the community to encourage participation and talent development, not to discourage it.
Reply
#13
DaviDC. wrote:
In order to play, they should be subjected to the same crap that the other students face on a daily basis.

a homeschoolers joke.

when you're asked if you're concerned about your kids missing essential conventional school experiences just say no because at least once a day you shove them into the bathroom, beat them up and take their lunch money. :thumbsup:

another homeschooler's joke:

tell your homeschooled child that when talking to public school kids speak slowly and use little words.

(this would be arrogant except in my son's first year of public school he was being bullied. at a parent teacher conference with his freshman advisor/history teacher i was told perhaps it would help if my son wasn't so serious and didn't talk about politics or current events so much.)

btw, at my son's school the state does not pay for sports. the parent's booster organization fundraises for that. i don't think they allow homeschoolers to participate.
Reply
#14
Graylocks

(this would be arrogant except in my son's first year of public school he was being bullied. at a parent teacher conference with his freshman advisor/history teacher i was told perhaps it would help if my son wasn't so serious and didn't talk about politics or current events so much.)

Same thing happened to my son in 10th grade English at a parent teacher conference. The teacher said she would continue to mark my son down for "using those big words"! The next day I confronted that teacher in a meeting with the principal and had my son take a test to immediately move him to 11th grade English.
Reply
#15
What isn't mentioned in the Tebow story is that he moved into a particular apartment with his mother in order to play for a particular coach who just happened to run the football camp he attended.

This opens a huge can of recruiting worms.
Reply
#16
Ombligo wrote:
What isn't mentioned in the Tebow story is that he moved into a particular apartment with his mother in order to play for a particular coach who just happened to run the football camp he attended.

This opens a huge can of recruiting worms.
Of course it does.

Why do you think the NCAA investigated Michael Oher and the Old Miss connection?
Reply
#17
Ombligo wrote:
What isn't mentioned in the Tebow story is that he moved into a particular apartment with his mother in order to play for a particular coach who just happened to run the football camp he attended.

This opens a huge can of recruiting worms.

People can live anywhere they choose, and it's quite common to move to a neighborhood because you want your child affiliated with that neighborhood's public schools. Unless that school district had a rule prohibiting home-schooled students from playing football in the local high school, I don't see what would be wrong with this.
Reply
#18
Grace62 wrote:
People can live anywhere they choose, and it's quite common to move to a neighborhood because you want your child affiliated with that neighborhood's public schools. Unless that school district had a rule prohibiting home-schooled students from playing football in the local high school, I don't see what would be wrong with this.
I misread the earlier post and failed to connect that his FAMILY (mother) moved with him. That of course makes it a non-issue. For some reason I was thinking of the instances where kids moved in with relatives or were emancipated and lived elsewhere - withOUT their parents - as sometimes happens.

My mistake.
Reply
#19
They lived in the home (which belonged to friend) on school days, then went "home" to be with the rest of the family on other days. Dad stayed with the other kids who wanted to go to a different school.

Yes, it was legal by the Florida High School Sports Association rules, but it was hardly in the spirit of the rule.

However - why schools must be the site of all thing athletic should be considered. In other parts of the world, clubs and leagues fulfill that need. How much would be saved if the US adopted a similar model.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)