|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137
Goal Kick
|
OP
Goal Kick
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137 |
For whatever reason the HSL has choosen to not allow homeschool athletic teams all over SC to participate in HSL sanctioned tournaments, not only in soccer but all other sports as well. I am speaking for Providence Athletic Club, which has been allow to participate for the last three years in various tournaments and has enjoyed the competition and I believe others have benefited from our participation. It is our hope that this decision will be adjusted to allow our athletes the opportunity to be apart of the tournaments offered throughout the state. PAC comes for the competition and the family friendly environment; sometimes we win, sometimes we lose but whatever the outcome our teams look forward to the thrill of being in a tournament. It is not our goal to force our way into the play-offs or championships. It is our hope that we would be supported by the coaches and soccer programs that we have developed relationships with over the past three years. You all have been wonderful accepting us into your tournaments and giving us games from the very beginning, for that I want to say Thank You! Our soul objective is to let these kids play and create memories of playing High School soccer (for my kids)and the various other sports this ruling is affecting as well!
I wish you all the best as you begin your conditioning and hope to see you this spring in games and tournaments this spring!
Jennifer Aurednik
Providence Athletic Club
Athletic Director
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
I'm really not sure what the League is trying to accomplish by excluding teams from invitational tournaments, except to exert another element of control. Leagues and championships I understand completely, but invitationals...well, now you're telling schools who they're allowed to invite.
I'm always saddened when I see politics placed above young people. Just my two cents.
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 876
Brace
|
|
Brace
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 876 |
I have mixed feelings about this one. SCHSL is supposed to tell its members who they can play. This is one measure of its organizational function. Without guidelines schools could all do what they please and chaos would prevail. However, I do know that the league has granted permission for teams (like the one I took to Italy in 1996) to compete in foreign tournaments against clubs from other countries. I am not sure what the difference is.
The Weather Is Here. Wish You Were Beautiful.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062
brace
|
|
brace
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 |
To me, if you can play/scrimmage private schools, why not home schools? If you can play public and private schools from other states, why not home schools? I know that a lot of SCISAA schools play versus home schools.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 688
goal
|
|
goal
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 688 |
It is odd, in regular season they can play textile teams, college teams, clubs etc. They (SCHSL) get weird when awards are given, championships etc.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Wayne,
I agree that it is the function of the League to govern and provide guidelines. As I said, when it comes to league competition, that's the whole point of being part of an organization. For invitational tournaments, though...seems a little more flexibility could be used. As Backscreen17 pointed out, if "schools may play non-member private schools, parochial schools and preparatory
schools...teams such as college freshman, alumni or textile teams" (SCHSL Constitution, Article VIII, Section 2) as regular-season games, how are we protecting the integrity of competition by excluding home school teams?
Are the home schools considered public schools? In that case, they would be considered non-member public schools, which the League Constitution explicitly forbids. However, the Constitution has not changed recently, to my knowledge...if PAC and others like them were allowed to compete in invitationals previously, they were either approved by the League in violation of the Constitution before, or letting them play is not in violation of the Constitution now.
Which is it?
Last edited by Coach Chass; 11/07/12 09:16 PM.
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137
Goal Kick
|
|
OP
Goal Kick
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137 |
Coach Chass,
I am not current on all the HSL rules, but I can tell you "home school" teams are not public schools. In the past three years that we have played in various tournaments there has been occasion that I have had to call the HSL and talk with the commissioner. In 2010 he initially denied us (PAC)entry into the very first tournament we tried to enter, but later gave us approval and basically said he would watch our "behavior" and "conduct" in the tournament. We had no problems until this fall. All four teams JV and Varsity have been in numerous tournaments.
Our JV girls have had the most success, winning the Irmo JV highest bracket last spring. We usually finish somewhere in the middle to lower end of the tournaments. Is this a problem?
I was told one of the issues is that we could possibly travel around the state and recruit "the best" players. Really??? I can tell you this, you can't recruit anyone to give up their job and home school their child/children unless they have a very good reason to do so. Another thing, if you know any home schoolers you will know there are not that many who are willing to forego "family time" to cart a child across state to play soccer, let alone pay hundreds of $$$. Remember this is a one income family more than likely and most likely thier child has only played rec or church league.
Honestly, we are not a threat to any public or private school team. We try to follow the HSL rules as closely as possible, not because we have to but because we don't want to cause any problems. There are somethings that we have to do that may seem "unfair", like having tryouts early. Reason being #1 so I will know we have enough players for each team and have time to notify teams we have scheduled with if we cannot fulfill our commitment, #2 so uniforms can be ordered. Each player has to pay for their uniforms therefore they get to keep them, so we run more like a club purchasing uniforms every two years but having to order for those joining in on the odd year. Being funded totally by the player, there is no other way to make it work.
We are not out to make money or gain big titles (everyone likes to win though:) It is about the kids, their development as athletes and letting them have fun in the process.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062
brace
|
|
brace
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 |
For all in the Charleston area who may not know ...
When you see Lowcountry Wildcats in a high school basketball box score, you're seeing the local home school team.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
I can certainly see why the League would protect its members from having to compete with teams that do not follow the same recruitment, attendance, and practice rules as League teams. Still, invitational tournaments are, by definition, well--by invitation. Schools choose who they want to invite, and schools choose whether they wish to attend and compete with the other schools invited. If teams CHOOSE to invite another team for competition in an invitational tournament, what is the League protecting us from?
Also, as previously noted, League schools are allowed to CHOOSE to compete with a variety of other types of teams who obviously do not follow the same rules of recruiting, practice, etc. as League teams...so there must be another issue at work here.
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062
brace
|
|
brace
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 |
Coach: I'm with you on this. I would add that the SCHSL might be more concerned about the practices of its parochial school members, at least one of which has recruited athletes across ALL sports FOR YEARS.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 478
Goal
|
|
Goal
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 478 |
Quote:
Coach Chass,
I am not current on all the HSL rules, but I can tell you "home school" teams are not public schools. In the past three years that we have played in various tournaments there has been occasion that I have had to call the HSL and talk with the commissioner. In 2010 he initially denied us (PAC)entry into the very first tournament we tried to enter, but later gave us approval and basically said he would watch our "behavior" and "conduct" in the tournament. We had no problems until this fall. All four teams JV and Varsity have been in numerous tournaments.
Our JV girls have had the most success, winning the Irmo JV highest bracket last spring. We usually finish somewhere in the middle to lower end of the tournaments. Is this a problem?
I was told one of the issues is that we could possibly travel around the state and recruit "the best" players. Really??? I can tell you this, you can't recruit anyone to give up their job and home school their child/children unless they have a very good reason to do so. Another thing, if you know any home schoolers you will know there are not that many who are willing to forego "family time" to cart a child across state to play soccer, let alone pay hundreds of $$$. Remember this is a one income family more than likely and most likely thier child has only played rec or church league.
Honestly, we are not a threat to any public or private school team. We try to follow the HSL rules as closely as possible, not because we have to but because we don't want to cause any problems. There are somethings that we have to do that may seem "unfair", like having tryouts early. Reason being #1 so I will know we have enough players for each team and have time to notify teams we have scheduled with if we cannot fulfill our commitment, #2 so uniforms can be ordered. Each player has to pay for their uniforms therefore they get to keep them, so we run more like a club purchasing uniforms every two years but having to order for those joining in on the odd year. Being funded totally by the player, there is no other way to make it work.
We are not out to make money or gain big titles (everyone likes to win though:) It is about the kids, their development as athletes and letting them have fun in the process.
I admire what your organization is doing and if my wife was able to stay at home and homeschool, she would.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 688
goal
|
|
goal
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 688 |
Could you "B.E." more transparent? 
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 422
Goal
|
|
Goal
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 422 |
Quote:
I was told one of the issues is that we could possibly travel around the state and recruit "the best" players. Really???
It Is, What It Is, They must "B.E." thinking of another school. 
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 688
goal
|
|
goal
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 688 |
Quote:
Quote:
I was told one of the issues is that we could possibly travel around the state and recruit "the best" players. Really???
It Is, What It Is, They must "B.E." thinking of another school.
I was making a joke, but I believe, it is what the other guy meant. I may be wrong, he can clarify.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 422
Goal
|
|
Goal
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 422 |
What about the "Tim Tebow Law?" As a group of home-schooled students they may not be able to play, but due to the Equal Access to Interscholastic Activities Act, they each can individually participate with any school of their choosing. I may be misinterpreting the Law, but with the students now having a choice of what school to play for, the HSL must feel that there is no need to allow Home-School teams access to competitive play.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 688
goal
|
|
goal
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 688 |
You are probably right, that is the only thing that has changed. I know a young lady who is a senior getting to play her first high school season - a home schooled kid. Chapman is very fourtunate to get her.
As far as a team of them goes... who cares, as long as they are age appropriate let them play, IMHO. We should be about getting kids engauged and not making them stay at home.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 422
Goal
|
|
Goal
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 422 |
I am glad that home school kids can play in Public schools, but then the HSL should be more concerned about possible recruiting. At least with a Home School team, you had a BETTER chance of the players all being from the same area.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137
Goal Kick
|
|
OP
Goal Kick
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137 |
You are correct, the "Tim Tebow" law was passed this summer. It is great for home schoolers, it opens up many opportunities not only in athletics but in other extra curricular activities that we have never had before and had it been passed three years ago PAC never would have been formed. My concern then was only for my son and giving him a place to play, he would have made any public school team without a doubt. Today my concern is for the other kids that play PAC soccer and the close to two hundred kids that participate in the other PAC sports as well as the other home school sports organizations. Do we pack it up and say go try out for your local public school? The fact of the matter is most of the kids would not make the public school team for a variety of reasons. If you are a "Tim Tebow", of course you will make it, but if it is between a home schooler and a public school kid with equal talent that has been a part of the program since 7th grade, who is going to make the team?
Back then I would have said "it is what it is, either you have what it takes or you don't". Today I see how much our organization benefits these kids who would otherwise not play high school athletics. We have been blessed with great coaches that put their heart and soul into these kids and have brought them to the point that they can compete well with most jv and varsity programs at the A-AAA level. This year I will not even have child playing PAC full time (daughter plays club still in spring and my son won't be eligible), but I could never shut it down because of that or because of the law that was passed that may allow a fraction of our participants to play at the local high school.
Is there not room for our teams? If the SCHSL doesn't care that we play region games, why would it matter that we play in a couple tournaments? I'm trying to understand, but frankly it makes no sense and is actually putting more restrictions on independant organizations than were there to begin with. I feel as though we have taken a huge step backwards instead of forwards. I don't believe that is what was intended when the equal access law was passed.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137
Goal Kick
|
|
OP
Goal Kick
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137 |
Another point...most of the better players are going to tryout at their local high schools as in the example stated above. The point is to let the kids play, mediocre or best of the best, all can kids benefit from playing at the high school level.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 688
goal
|
|
goal
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 688 |
When in doubt, we should let kids play. Involved kids are less like to slip into something bad.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 688
goal
|
|
goal
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 688 |
Quote:
I am glad that home school kids can play in Public schools, but then the HSL should be more concerned about possible recruiting. At least with a Home School team, you had a BETTER chance of the players all being from the same area.
The way I understand it, you have to play where you would play if you went to the public school. No recruiting possible, if it was possible I would have gone for the young lady that will bless the Chapman fields, just 10 miles away...   
Since I am just a dad, I can do that... 
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 422
Goal
|
|
Goal
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 422 |
The system is flawed, but this is true for most. It does have its shortcomings. By allowing home schooled kids to participate in H.S. sports, they kids can experience more. But also by having this option, the HSL seems to see Home School sports teams more as a head-ache when in fact they should see it as an opportunity to help the growth and development of students. I hope that all Home School athletic programs try to fight this and get a change made.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Perhaps someone else is seeing a "big picture" that I am not, but I can't see any harm to the League caused by allowing its members the OPTION to schedule games with home school teams that would outweigh the benefits provided to young people by their participation in competitive sports.
I would invite someone from the other side of the decision-making process to weigh in with the reasoning behind the ruling.
Is there anyone out there connected to the League who (A) pays attention to the soccer community through this message board and (B) is willing to share the justification behind the decision?
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137
Goal Kick
|
|
OP
Goal Kick
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137 |
That is correct, you can only tryout for the high school team that you are zoned for. You can't go across town and tryout for Irmo when you are zoned for Eau Claire. I'm sure at some point someone is going to try to get around this, but not to my knowledge yet.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 422
Goal
|
|
Goal
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 422 |
When you have multiple instances where ineligible players participate in other sports and the only way they are caught is someone tells on them, then I have no doubt, that someone will try to get around it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 876
Brace
|
|
Brace
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 876 |
I know this sounds terrible and I don’t mean it to… But, I sometimes think the home-school community wants their cake and to eat it too. There are ramifications for our decisions. If you decide that our public schools do not meet your needs, then they don’t meet your needs. One should not be allowed, in my opinion, to cherry-pick what they like or don’t like about our public schools. When a family makes a choice, and it is a choice, to home-school, these are the ramifications. There are sacrifices we all make when we make important decisions. If this course were to continue, where would it end? Should a parent be allowed to send their child to the math teacher at the local high school but still home-school in other subjects? Do not misunderstand me. I am not against home-schooling. My niece home-schools. Her kids are awesome. I have a lot of respect for her and I love her kids, all 6 of them. I know home-school families pay taxes. And I also know that they benefit indirectly when the public at-large is educated, when the girl at the check-out can make correct change, for example. I also know that we all pay taxes for our police and fire protection. But, I don’t see us being allowed to drive the fire truck.
I apologize if that sounds raw. It is just one person's opinion and not intended to persuade or influence the decisions of others.
The Weather Is Here. Wish You Were Beautiful.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
From an athletic competition standpoint, it makes more sense from where I'm standing to allow home schools to have teams that compete under their own banner than to have schools athletically represented by players who are not a part of the schools they represent.
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137
Goal Kick
|
|
OP
Goal Kick
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137 |
Quote:
I know this sounds terrible and I don’t mean it to… But, I sometimes think the home-school community wants their cake and to eat it too. There are ramifications for our decisions. If you decide that our public schools do not meet your needs, then they don’t meet your needs. One should not be allowed, in my opinion, to cherry-pick what they like or don’t like about our public schools. When a family makes a choice, and it is a choice, to home-school, these are the ramifications. There are sacrifices we all make when we make important decisions. If this course were to continue, where would it end? Should a parent be allowed to send their child to the math teacher at the local high school but still home-school in other subjects? Do not misunderstand me. I am not against home-schooling. My niece home-schools. Her kids are awesome. I have a lot of respect for her and I love her kids, all 6 of them. I know home-school families pay taxes. And I also know that they benefit indirectly when the public at-large is educated, when the girl at the check-out can make correct change, for example. I also know that we all pay taxes for our police and fire protection. But, I don’t see us being allowed to drive the fire truck.
I apologize if that sounds raw. It is just one person's opinion and not intended to persuade or influence the decisions of others.
I don't disagree with you, we all want the best of both worlds. You are right it is all about the choices we have made. Because I chose to home school I also chose to create the opportunity necessary for my kids to play high school sports along with the other home school parents who have given countless hours and money to make this happen for their kids. Don't get me wrong, I know so many public school parents who are as equally devoted to their kids and are involved in their education. We all chose the route that is best for our families and situations. As far as sending our kids to public school for certain subjects, you have to remember we have choosen to home school for certain reasons, most of which is to keep our kids out of the public school. Sorry if that is offensive, it is not the education that most concerns us but the environment (this is strictly my opinion). I know many public school teachers and respect their efforts and know we as a society could not do without them. But right now I have the ability to make the choice to keep my kids home. If my child needs extra help in a subject or I feel inadequate teaching something, I will find a tutor or local resource center that will meet the need and pay for it. This could open up a whole other discussion, however the point is we all make the choices that seem the most beneficial to our families and thank God we still live in a society where we are free to try to create better situations for ourselves if we are willing to work hard and devote our talents to obtain a desired goal.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Another possible positive benefit to allowing competition between home school teams and public school teams--perhaps it's good to give the home-schooled players an opportunity to interact with their public-school counterparts in an atmosphere of friendly competition and sportsmanship. It's healthy, I think, for young people to get to see the more positive sides of both environments.
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 263
Corner Kick
|
|
Corner Kick
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 263 |
Quote:
I know this sounds terrible and I don’t mean it to… But, I sometimes think the home-school community wants their cake and to eat it too. There are ramifications for our decisions. If you decide that our public schools do not meet your needs, then they don’t meet your needs. One should not be allowed, in my opinion, to cherry-pick what they like or don’t like about our public schools. When a family makes a choice, and it is a choice, to home-school, these are the ramifications. There are sacrifices we all make when we make important decisions. If this course were to continue, where would it end? Should a parent be allowed to send their child to the math teacher at the local high school but still home-school in other subjects? Do not misunderstand me. I am not against home-schooling. My niece home-schools. Her kids are awesome. I have a lot of respect for her and I love her kids, all 6 of them. I know home-school families pay taxes. And I also know that they benefit indirectly when the public at-large is educated, when the girl at the check-out can make correct change, for example. I also know that we all pay taxes for our police and fire protection. But, I don’t see us being allowed to drive the fire truck.
I apologize if that sounds raw. It is just one person's opinion and not intended to persuade or influence the decisions of others.
I agree. In my opinion, the Home Schoolers should not be allowed to play for the public schools.
That privilege should be reserved for the students and families who attend and support the schools.
If the school is not good enough for you, the athletics are not either.
And just wait till a Home Schooler takes a position on a roster that a regular student had or could have.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137
Goal Kick
|
|
OP
Goal Kick
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137 |
I don't think you understood what was said, it is not about one being better than the other at all. It is about choice and doing what you feel is best for your kids. By the way, last time I checked my tax dollars do go to support your public schools so why shouldn't these kids be able to benefit from the extra curricular activities offered?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 263
Corner Kick
|
|
Corner Kick
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 263 |
Sorry, but I disagree with you.
Wayne has the right idea. If you make the decision to Home School, good for you, but there are ramifications.
We do not need athletes who show up for practice and games and are not a part of the student body and it's environment.
It's all part of being a team. And the team represents the school.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
I don't think you understood what was said, it is not about one being better than the other at all. It is about choice and doing what you feel is best for your kids. By the way, last time I checked my tax dollars do go to support your public schools so why shouldn't these kids be able to benefit from the extra curricular activities offered?
To be fair--that's a somewhat deceptive argument. While it's true that a percentage of everyone's tax dollars go to support public schools, schools receive ALLOCATIONS of those tax dollars based on actual ENROLLMENT. So a student who is not enrolled in the school would be using the school resources without bringing in the proportionate allocation that would accompany his/her enrollment.
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 876
Brace
|
|
Brace
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 876 |
Quote:
I don't think you understood what was said, it is not about one being better than the other at all. It is about choice and doing what you feel is best for your kids. By the way, last time I checked my tax dollars do go to support your public schools so why shouldn't these kids be able to benefit from the extra curricular activities offered?
You do pay taxes. And, you do benefit from public education, whether your kids attend public schools or not. To repeat, you also pay for the fire truck that you don't get to drive.
The Weather Is Here. Wish You Were Beautiful.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 76
Throw In
|
|
Throw In
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 76 |
My Grandmother paid taxes for years and did not drive.
Thank goodness we have roads so I could drive her to the store.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 271
corner kick
|
|
corner kick
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 271 |
PAC should be in a club league. Their name itself has club in it. They have no practice rules, no recruiting rules, no behavior rules and no way to punish a kid other than not letting them play for them. It is a liability risk for any school public or private to play such a club.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137
Goal Kick
|
|
OP
Goal Kick
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 137 |
I don't want go this route... but I think if you gave money towards education, that money is taken and given to another district for other kids, and then you are asked to pay more money for your child's books and supplies you wouldn't be real happy about it? That is eccentially what home schoolers do. Again I have choosen this route and am not complaining, just stating a fact. I realize our taxes go towards many things that benefit everyone, but education is a big part of it and if you insist we benefit from the public education system then you will have to concur that you also benefit from those that home school and go to private schools.
I think with this we need to agree to disagree. Life is not fair, the law was passed, it is now up to you to work to over turn it if you don't like it, you have that freedom.
The fact of the matter is, only a fraction of home schoolers will actually attempt to try out and I'm sure the coaches will only select ones for teams that they are absolutely sure will benefit them. I don't believe spots will be taken from public school students and given to a homeschooler if they are at the same level.
If we get back to the original point of this thread, home school teams have been created and we want to be allowed to play in tournaments. We are not trying to infiltrate your public school teams, which from the sound of it some of you don't want home school kids on the team anyways. PAC parents and most of the players are happy with what we have to offer. But there are some who would be very proud to play for their local high school, they would represent what ever team well and be proud to do so. Believe it or not, this law doesn't benefit PAC or the other home school programs. We are feeling the affects by losing some players and having the privilege of being a part of tournaments taken away.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 478
Goal
|
|
Goal
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 478 |
Quote:
It is a liability risk for any school public or private to play such a club.
How so?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 478
Goal
|
|
Goal
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 478 |
If people decide to homeschool their children for whatever their reason, there are rules that they have to follow. It's not like they have no accountability.
Sure, they pay taxes, and the homeschoolers know this, and it is a decision they have made.
I pay taxes and my child attends a public school. That is my choice.
Some of the arguments are ridiculous saying that since the child doesn't attend the school, they shouldn't be allowed to compete in SCHSL sanctioned events and the reason is that we don't get to drive a police car? That is illogical. A child from 6 to 16 is required, by state law, to attend some sort of school. Not everyone is required by law, in all circumstances, to use the services of the police or fire department.
If you want all those sports and coaching supplements to go down the drain, please vote for the tax voucher where people can do whatever they want to with their money. You can kiss many sports programs bye-bye, because that is what will go first, not the educators' salaries.
Tim Tebow...his name ring a bell? yeah...home schooled kid. I am sure am glad that he wasn't able to compete in any HS sports sanctioned events.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Again, to be clear--I want young people to be able to play sports. I think it's great that PAC and others like them are organizing home school athletes into teams, and I think they should have opportunities to compete just like any other organized non-public school team.
I still have questions about the fairness of having students who are otherwise no part of a school representing that school in athletic competition. And as most of you know, I am a dealer in rhetorical arguments, so I can't resist digging into the argument itself, regardless of my opinion of the overall issue.
Let's accept, for the sake of analysis, the argument that has been made several times that home schooling is an academic placement choice, made by the parents for the educational and environmental benefit of the students, so it should not be used to deny the students the opportunities for athletic competition at their local public schools.
Therefore (as passed by law), parents who choose the alternative academic placement of home school should still, as taxpaying citizens, be able to send their children to play on athletic teams with the public school for which they are zoned since they would not have the opportunity to play their sport of choice otherwise.
Likewise, the decision to send a child to a private rather than a public school is an academic placement choice, made by the parents for the educational and environmental benefit of the students, so it should not be used to deny the students the opportunities for athletic competition at their local public schools if the private school of choice does not offer the athletic programs desired.
Therefore, parents who choose the alternative academic placement of private school should still, as taxpaying citizens, be able to send their children to play on athletic teams with the public school for which they are zoned since they would not have the opportunity to play their sport of choice otherwise.
No, wait...that's not allowed. Those parents made a decision to place their child in a private institution and therefore the students are limited by the offerings of the chosen institution.
Can someone explain the difference?
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 249
Corner Kick
|
|
Corner Kick
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 249 |
I do believe that much of the stance of the HSL changed when the new law passed to allow home-schoolers to participate in athletics at their respectively zoned high schools. Thus, WHY is their a need for a PAC or other organization? Surely, those PAC-players are zone to some public school, aren't they?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 478
Goal
|
|
Goal
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 478 |
1. Are students required to try out for a team?
2. If a student wants to play for a school team, expresses, that desire, has the grades, meets all the qualifications of attending that school, does that mean that he will automatically be placed on that team?
3. Are athletic teams a requirement by the law?
4. If a student in a certain district attends a school that does not have a sport that he wants to participate in and another school in that same district has that sport, is he required to transfer to that school or can said student participate in that sport at a school he does not attend as long as he is a student in that district?
The answers should help shed some light on your questions
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
1. Are students required to try out for a team?
2. If a student wants to play for a school team, expresses, that desire, has the grades, meets all the qualifications of attending that school, does that mean that he will automatically be placed on that team?
3. Are athletic teams a requirement by the law?
4. If a student in a certain district attends a school that does not have a sport that he wants to participate in and another school in that same district has that sport, is he required to transfer to that school or can said student participate in that sport at a school he does not attend as long as he is a student in that district?
The answers should help shed some light on your questions
1. No, participation in athletics is completely optional--unless you're asking if students have to try out in order to be placed on a team, in which case the answer in most cases is yes.
2. No--see #1.
3. No, except for Title IX requirements that mandate a balance of opportunities for both genders.
4. According to League rules, a student attending a school that does not offer a particular sports program can play that sport at another public school that is a member of the same district.
So...how do these answers help to distinguish between the family who chooses home schooling as an alternative placement to public schools (currently allowed to participate on the local public school team), and the family who chooses private school as an alternative placement to public schools (currently NOT allowed to participate on the local public school team)?
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 374
Corner Kick
|
|
Corner Kick
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 374 |
Following this with (somewhat vetsed) interest.
Having myself before faced some of these challenges with my kids at one time attending a public charter school with no athletic program.
I took the club route at the time to form a (school) team to compete where we could (U13/14/15 girls mix). Of course it helped that I could since I had immediate access to a club and a friendly registrar. I opted this route quickly because it gave me some access to fields and necessary insurance coverage. Also I tried to decipher what it would take to become a member of SCHSL (since the school was public) and soon became lost and gave up. I never once thought it would be OK to compete against JV or HS teams since I imagined they must, in turn, have policies and rules in place to cover all the necessary liability and insurance needs. Just like SCYS has rules to cover sanctioned play only (another great debate), I certainly accepted HS teams had something similar. For the record, our approach was not succesful since to be registered to play, certain families would have to transfer or relinquish existing club ties, or at best 'guest' only at tournaments. This of course limited the pool of players ready to commit to the school (really club) team since the depth of talent was shallow and they were (rightly so) quite happy with their existing club situation.
Could PAC somehow apply to become members and 'get in' that way ? Still I am confused now reading here that the students can readily apply to their zoned teams now which means the whole need for the home schooled, & charter type teams goes away as Hatch suggested. I certainly accept that it may be hard to compete for a roster spot on a public high school (particularly in soccer rich communities) but how is that any different than young Susie (playing MPRD U14 rec ball) from Cario looking to get on Wando's team with 48 classic/challenge/ecnl players ahead of her. I am certain however that there are several schools who will take a warm body to fill a roster in less (soccer) rich communities. Again, just one of those life isn't fair, or life choice considerations on where we choose to love and public school options.
My eldest is now approaching high school (9th grade next year) and some of these challenges exist since we will likely opt out of her zoned public high school (and probably choose private). Our choice thankfully is not based on athletics since she'll have to sit out an entire year because of another policy that is in play to offset other recruiting concerns. All way too bizarre and heavy handed for kids who really have little to no choice where we parents put them for their schooling based on our goals, preferences, location, informed insight and often economic situation. Coach Chas, in our situation, we have a family that is choosing to attend private school (over public) but can not participate in athletics because this private school participates in public school leagues (and not private). Way too confusing (-: So be it.
satus quod perago validus - start and finish strong
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
Some of the arguments are ridiculous saying that since the child doesn't attend the school, they shouldn't be allowed to compete in SCHSL sanctioned events and the reason is that we don't get to drive a police car? That is illogical. A child from 6 to 16 is required, by state law, to attend some sort of school. Not everyone is required by law, in all circumstances, to use the services of the police or fire department.
Playing on a sports team, which is, arguably, a benefit to the development of those who participate, is certainly not the same as letting everyone drive the fire truck or the police car, which has no clear developmental benefit to the joyrider and creates a hazard to the community and a disruption of the function of the department. Faulty analogy--point awarded.
However, counterpoint--a child is required, by law, to attend some sort of school, but that does not indicate that the child is required by law to participate in extracurricular activities. Therefore, the school attendance law has little bearing on the argument about sports participation.
Non sequitur...point nullified by counterpoint.
Please continue. 
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
I do believe that much of the stance of the HSL changed when the new law passed to allow home-schoolers to participate in athletics at their respectively zoned high schools. Thus, WHY is their a need for a PAC or other organization? Surely, those PAC-players are zone to some public school, aren't they?
Hatch, I thought about that too, that perhaps the change of stance about letting home school teams participate was due to the fact that those students now have an opportunity to play for public school teams%
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
I do believe that much of the stance of the HSL changed when the new law passed to allow home-schoolers to participate in athletics at their respectively zoned high schools. Thus, WHY is their a need for a PAC or other organization? Surely, those PAC-players are zone to some public school, aren't they?
Quote:
I do believe that much of the stance of the HSL changed when the new law passed to allow home-schoolers to participate in athletics at their respectively zoned high schools. Thus, WHY is their a need for a PAC or other organization? Surely, those PAC-players are zone to some public school, aren't they?
Hatch, I thought about that too, that perhaps the change of stance about letting home school teams participate was due to the fact that those students now have an opportunity to play for public school teams, so in the opinion of the League perhaps home school teams became unnecessary.
Still, I think decisions about who can and cannot participate in competition should be based on established rules and guidelines for said competition, not opinions about "needs" and relevance.
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 478
Goal
|
|
Goal
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 478 |
Quote:
Quote:
1. Are students required to try out for a team?
2. If a student wants to play for a school team, expresses, that desire, has the grades, meets all the qualifications of attending that school, does that mean that he will automatically be placed on that team?
3. Are athletic teams a requirement by the law?
4. If a student in a certain district attends a school that does not have a sport that he wants to participate in and another school in that same district has that sport, is he required to transfer to that school or can said student participate in that sport at a school he does not attend as long as he is a student in that district?
The answers should help shed some light on your questions
1. No, participation in athletics is completely optional--unless you're asking if students have to try out in order to be placed on a team, in which case the answer in most cases is yes.
2. No--see #1.
3. No, except for Title IX requirements that mandate a balance of opportunities for both genders.
4. According to League rules, a student attending a school that does not offer a particular sports program can play that sport at another public school that is a member of the same district.
So...how do these answers help to distinguish between the family who chooses home schooling as an alternative placement to public schools (currently allowed to participate on the local public school team), and the family who chooses private school as an alternative placement to public schools (currently NOT allowed to participate on the local public school team)?
Private school =/= home school
bascially, my point on the first 3 were to say that just because one pays taxes, it doesn't give that person the automatic right to be on a team, but it does give them the opportunity.
To me, it is no different than a coach asking parents to host an exchange student to beef up their team. Here is a kid that comes to the country, does not have family that pays taxes, and could take the place of another kid that has grown up in that district because the coach just wants to win without developing their own players.
Isn't this really what this is all about...people don't want to lose? If you get beat by a home school team, then what does that mean? (rhetorical question there)
I don't see the problem with allowing them on teams or allowing them to compete in a league.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
Private school =/= home school
I agree. My point was, strictly from the standpoint of the arguments that have been presented so far, the distinction has not been made. Families who pick home school are making an educational choice for their children; families who pick private school are making an educational choice for their children. Familes who choose home school pay taxes; families who choose private school pay taxes. Home schools are not a part of the district education system of the local public school; private schools are not part of the district education system of the local public school.
Home school students have a right of access to the the local public school's extracurricular offerings that are not offered by their academic and environmental choice,home schooling--private school students do not have a right of access to the local public school's extracurricular activities that are not offered by their academic and environmental choice, the private school.
I don't think any of the previous arguments have adequately distinguished why one student should have a right of access when the other does not.
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 876
Brace
|
|
Brace
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 876 |
I am sorry I did not make my point more clearly. Let me try again (with the fire truck analogy). It was intended as a point of argument against allowing home-schoolers to play sports at public schools, and to refute the point that, by virtue of paying taxes, home-schoolers are owed the opportunity, by pointing out that most of us pay taxes for services we may never use, but still benefit from. My quality of life is better when the general population is better educated and most education occurs in public schools. So, I don’t have to attend or send my kids there to benefit. Otherwise, when my kids are out of school, I would not have to pay taxes for schools. My quality of life is better when the fire department puts out the fire down the street before my house catches on. So, I want and benefit from a good FD and a good educational system whether I use them or not.
I will say again that cherry-picking programs that meet our standards for our kids is wrong, in my opinion. But, that genie is out of the bottle and I don’t see her going back in.
The Weather Is Here. Wish You Were Beautiful.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2
Coach
|
|
Coach
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,256 Likes: 2 |
Follow-up point to the previous:
By the same logic, private school teams, textile teams, alumni teams, college teams, and home school club teams are all non-member, non-public-school teams that do not have the same practice, recruiting, and seasonal rules as SCHSL teams. What is the difference between home school teams and the others listed that distinguishes why SCHSL teams are allowed to voluntarily compete against private school teams, textile teams, alumni teams, and college teams, but not home school teams?
I've got good news and bad news...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 478
Goal
|
|
Goal
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 478 |
Well, from the standpoint of the law, no, there is no "right" for home schoolers to participate in public school anything unless the constitution for that state is amended. There are 10 states that are Equal Access states...we ain't one of them. In those states, home school students have to meet certain requirements in order to participate on the teams. The requirements are something along the lines of meeting the requirements of any other student, passing their core subjects, and be in compliance with the state home school laws.
BTW, I have never used the word "right" in any of my arguments, not that anyone has accused me of it, but just to make sure I get that on the table.
I really don't see the big deal with allowing them to compete as a separate team as long as they meet all the other requirements that any other team meet.
Again, what's the big deal?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 270
corner kick
|
|
corner kick
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 270 |
Hey Wayne, I want half my taxes back! These 'fine' schools you refer to cant even graduate 50% of those that enter 9th grade. I wave every time I drive past a fast food franchise!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 263
Corner Kick
|
|
Corner Kick
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 263 |
Quote:
Hey Wayne, I want half my taxes back! These 'fine' schools you refer to cant even graduate 50% of those that enter 9th grade. I wave every time I drive past a fast food franchise!
cant??? Really??? You need to go school.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 281
corner kick
|
|
corner kick
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 281 |
RECCOS, RECCOS, RECCOS!! At least be factual!
Our state averages graduating 75% of students in 4 years. Students who take more than 4 years (which would include many Special Needs students, anyone who gets a GED, and any child who transfers to another school and graduates in 4 years)count against the report even if they graduate. I have nothing against private/home school, but look at the report card that give our great Charter schools a grade of a 70. Let the Home school kids play and then play in the SC private school tournaments. Everyone gets to play!!!
"Boys, even if it means dying on the pitch, we must win!" Marc-Vivien Foe 1975 - 2003
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 39
kick off
|
|
kick off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 39 |
Quote:
Hey Wayne, I want half my taxes back! These 'fine' schools you refer to cant even graduate 50% of those that enter 9th grade. I wave every time I drive past a fast food franchise!
Oh, you mean you wave because they have gone out and found a job to help pay their bills. Right? Because I am sure you are not implying that someone working at a fast food franchise should be looked down upon for any reason, right? Because I see people working at fast food franchises as someone who is going out to work hard to make money to pay their own bills. I am sure YOU would never want to discourage a contributing member of society who works at a job, to earn a paycheck. Regardless of whether or not they graduated high school, I am sure you are supportive of anyone who gets up, goes to work, and earns a paycheck. Because only a low-life, scumbag, sleaseball, would ever, ever, EVER make fun of people working hard at a fast food franchise, where they earn a paycheck to help pay their bills. Right?
You wouldn't know anyone who would do that, right?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 263
Corner Kick
|
|
Corner Kick
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 263 |
Careful now, Reccos may go the way Harry, JAK, upstatesoccermon and 1fortheteam have, and stop posting on this board.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 422
Goal
|
|
Goal
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 422 |
No matter how you look at it the there is going to be confusion somewhere. IMHO you have to look at it as this: yes a law was passed for Home School kids to participate in Public High School Athletics, but should they be forced to take advantage of it? For those who have benefited from Home School athletics and want to stay, should they be punished by taking what has helped them grow and develop away from them?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 270
corner kick
|
|
corner kick
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 270 |
Thanks for your concern bomber, but you don't have to worry about me .. I can take my punches!
Regardless, our education system is in trouble and has been for some time! Not sure anyone on this board could convince me otherwise.
HSS: You missed my point completely or perhaps I simply did a lousy job of illustrating it. What comes first? The education or the job?
CID: Fair enough. But I have a hang up regarding a certain school that pretends to be one of the best in the state and part of that is actually a result of finding a way of getting rid of the 'poor performing student'. Hence their roughly 50% grad rate.
Punch away.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 39
kick off
|
|
kick off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 39 |
Quote:
Thanks for your concern bomber, but you don't have to worry about me .. I can take my punches!
Regardless, our education system is in trouble and has been for some time! Not sure anyone on this board could convince me otherwise.
HSS: You missed my point completely or perhaps I simply did a lousy job of illustrating it. What comes first? The education or the job?
CID: Fair enough. But I have a hang up regarding a certain school that pretends to be one of the best in the state and part of that is actually a result of finding a way of getting rid of the 'poor performing student'. Hence their roughly 50% grad rate.
Punch away.
I'll agree that our education system is in need of repair, but at the same time it is also a social issue. The last thing this board needs is a political discussion on how to better serve those students who fall through the cracks.
I will say this, I felt your original post was very derogatory toward employees in the fast food industry. And there are a lot of them. It is sad when some kids drop out of school. Heck, my children have seen kids who were in their classes show up on the evening news. I don't believe in making fun of them, I just feel a sense of sadness.
I got your point, we all did. Your illustration was lousy, but only because it showed your true colors. You may not have liked it that I called you out on your callous and condescending tone, or you may have been embarrassed. (I would hope the latter, it would show that somewhere inside of you is empathy.) But it was pretty rude to put down a whole group of people for where they work. Especially coming off an election where class warfare was front and center in the national debates. I agree that education is more important - for us. But for some families, who don't have the income you or I or others on this board have, that fast food job that some 16 year old drop-out is working at may be the ONLY thing keeping a roof over his family's head. That is sad when you think about it, and should not be made fun of.
BTW, how many of you have had a player on your team that had to quit HS soccer because he had to go out and get a job at a fast food place to help support his family? His parents were still married, still at home, but his father got laid off during the recession, and the family needed every penny they could get, so the teens went out and got jobs and gave up their sports.
Do you REALLY want to keep waving at those kids with that smug grin on your face?
|
|
|
|
