|
|
Post by **** on Jul 1, 2020 16:27:27 GMT -6
This observation presents some interesting, and realistic facts...certainly worth considering. Prior to this covid crisis...this would probably have been considered biased thinking. Now...not so much so. Other than potentially some sport factory private schools though, how many situations would find this a relevant situation? How commonplace nationwide is the set up that would make this a factor? In Louisiana, if both Lincoln high and Washington High are governed by the same LEA, they aren't going to have the flexibility to either be open or not. They will follow the LEAs decision. If they are governed by different LEAs then a student wouldn't (legally) be able to choose which one to attend. Are things structured that vastly differently everywhere? Also what % of students are athletes at schools? Almost half the boys in our HS play football. We have about 125 boys in the school and roughly 50 on the team. XC has another 10-15 boys. There's at least half the boys in the school doing fall sports. We have many others that play basketball, wrestling, track, baseball, golf, and tennis that don't play fall sports. To say 75% of boys in our school play sports is seriously low balling it. That's not taking into account the band/theater kids that do 'activities' only and not sports. Almost every kid in our school (boy or girl) participates in something after school. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 1, 2020 16:56:39 GMT -6
Other than potentially some sport factory private schools though, how many situations would find this a relevant situation? How commonplace nationwide is the set up that would make this a factor? In Louisiana, if both Lincoln high and Washington High are governed by the same LEA, they aren't going to have the flexibility to either be open or not. They will follow the LEAs decision. If they are governed by different LEAs then a student wouldn't (legally) be able to choose which one to attend. Are things structured that vastly differently everywhere? Also what % of students are athletes at schools? Almost half the boys in our HS play football. We have about 125 boys in the school and roughly 50 on the team. XC has another 10-15 boys. There's at least half the boys in the school doing fall sports. We have many others that play basketball, wrestling, track, baseball, golf, and tennis that don't play fall sports. To say 75% of boys in our school play sports is seriously low balling it. That's not taking into account the band/theater kids that do 'activities' only and not sports. Almost every kid in our school (boy or girl) participates in something after school. And of that percentage..you feel there is a high percentage of kids who will simply drop out without sports? Come on man.... And EVEN if that is true. I would say that is not representative of most schools. Quoting a paper written by a Washington State University student, 19% of the students in the country attend "rural schools" . In some states that number may sit closer to 33%. |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 1, 2020 17:14:55 GMT -6
I know how the systems I m associated with work. That is why I pointed out my issues with the statement. I don't see any of the nearby systems (including Orleans Parish Public Schools) having to board up doors because there were no sports I'm guessing you haven't been in a rural community. There's a reason schools are already giving students the option to choose between virtual learning or return in person for 'normal' learning. They're taking more into account than the idea of "what is best for kids now" They know without in person school there is no sports. We already had a test run for virtual learning in 4th quarter. First month we tried to make kids do work. The school figured out all our kids got blue collar jobs and worked instead of writing a paper on 'To Kill a Mockingbird'. Thus work was made optional and your grade could only improve or you'd stick with your final 3rd quarter grade.... Or we could fail 75% the school. Our kids are worried about supporting their families. Not finding slope and y-intercept of a line. see above. It's past the point of feel. I know if we don't hit 90% attendance we don't get near as much funding. That's half of your 19-33% of kids. Based on our trial run that is easily done. I'm not saying going back is right/wrong. I'm just stating schools are weighing their options and the long term impacts of those choices. If it was clear cut then a decision would be made already. |
|
|
|
Post by morris on Jul 1, 2020 17:38:07 GMT -6
In the TN plans when it says regions does that mean geographical or are regions part of the classification system?
|
|
|
|
Post by 53 on Jul 1, 2020 17:56:52 GMT -6
In the TN plans when it says regions does that mean geographical or are regions part of the classification system? Classification system |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jul 1, 2020 17:59:55 GMT -6
If fewer kids are in schools then the state isn't going to provide as much money to said school. Why give the school $7,000(generic number) for a kid that's staying home? So you will have to lay people off because you can't afford to pay them and the ripple effect happens. I have worked a few places where the school was the largest employer in the area. Why keep a small school on the verge of consolidation open if there are no or fewer kids attending? Surely you can see that some schools will have problems keeping the door open. Because the student is still enrolled in the school. That is why they get whatever the per pupil funding amount is. The school is still providing the distance learning (if allowed by the state DOE). Now, I am not as familiar with how homeschool would work, and if these families chose homeschool I would imagine then no funding. But if a family is choosing homeschool, that is different than a school not opening its doors and providing distance learning options, and logically a family choosing homeschool would do that regardless of sports being offered. Talked to my supe the other day. Even if we provide instruction but they aren’t using our facilities we will receive less for those students. So yes it’s a real problem. That’s a big reason our gov. Want school to start and find a way to all be present or to do a/b schedules etc etc |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 1, 2020 18:02:33 GMT -6
I'm guessing you haven't been in a rural community. There's a reason schools are already giving students the option to choose between virtual learning or return in person for 'normal' learning. They're taking more into account than the idea of "what is best for kids now" They know without in person school there is no sports. We already had a test run for virtual learning in 4th quarter. First month we tried to make kids do work. The school figured out all our kids got blue collar jobs and worked instead of writing a paper on 'To Kill a Mockingbird'. Thus work was made optional and your grade could only improve or you'd stick with your final 3rd quarter grade.... Or we could fail 75% the school. Our kids are worried about supporting their families. Not finding slope and y-intercept of a line. see above. It's past the point of feel. I know if we don't hit 90% attendance we don't get near as much funding. That's half of your 19-33% of kids. Based on our trial run that is easily done. I'm not saying going back is right/wrong. I'm just stating schools are weighing their options and the long term impacts of those choices. If it was clear cut then a decision would be made already. You are telling me that your funding is not on a per pupil basis? The 19-33 % number was noting how many schools are considered "rural". Just pointing out that the viewpoint and situation is a minority. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 1, 2020 18:04:07 GMT -6
Because the student is still enrolled in the school. That is why they get whatever the per pupil funding amount is. The school is still providing the distance learning (if allowed by the state DOE). Now, I am not as familiar with how homeschool would work, and if these families chose homeschool I would imagine then no funding. But if a family is choosing homeschool, that is different than a school not opening its doors and providing distance learning options, and logically a family choosing homeschool would do that regardless of sports being offered. Talked to my supe the other day. Even if we provide instruction but they aren’t using our facilities we will receive less for those students. So yes it’s a real problem. That’s a big reason our gov. Want school to start and find a way to all be present or to do a/b schedules etc etc That sounds like a legislative issue, as well as a voters issue. If you receive less funding because a student isnt "butt in seat" then the taxpayers should demand a return of the taxes collected. That seems like an easy fix in this environment. |
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Jul 1, 2020 18:17:05 GMT -6
coachd5085 see above. It's past the point of feel. I know if we don't hit 90% attendance we don't get near as much funding. That's half of your 19-33% of kids. Based on our trial run that is easily done. I'm not saying going back is right/wrong. I'm just stating schools are weighing their options and the long term impacts of those choices. If it was clear cut then a decision would be made already. You are telling me that your funding is not on a per pupil basis? The 19-33 % number was noting how many schools are considered "rural". Just pointing out that the viewpoint and situation is a minority. Some states use daily attendance % as a qualifier for some state funding. Some use it in the rating of the school/district. Fall below these number for so many consecutive years and the state can step in and takeover. So yes daily attendance is a BIG deal in some states. In districts like mine that are inner city/urban it's a big concern. When kids are caught in the vicious cycle of poverty school might not be that big of a deal to them, give them a little nudge in the opposite way as this whole insane situation is and they aren't coming back or will be sporadic in attending. Why is it so hard for you to believe it's going to effect some schools? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2020 18:18:14 GMT -6
Almost half the boys in our HS play football. We have about 125 boys in the school and roughly 50 on the team. XC has another 10-15 boys. There's at least half the boys in the school doing fall sports. We have many others that play basketball, wrestling, track, baseball, golf, and tennis that don't play fall sports. To say 75% of boys in our school play sports is seriously low balling it. That's not taking into account the band/theater kids that do 'activities' only and not sports. Almost every kid in our school (boy or girl) participates in something after school. And of that percentage..you feel there is a high percentage of kids who will simply drop out without sports? Come on man.... And EVEN if that is true. I would say that is not representative of most schools. Quoting a paper written by a Washington State University student, 19% of the students in the country attend "rural schools" . In some states that number may sit closer to 33%. Anders4 is explaining our problem. They will sell weed before they lift a finger to do school work. And Here, that jobs is just so they can eat adequately. They will not have success with any form of virtual schooling, and kids will drop out left and right without sports, school activities. These do not have the funds and resources in many cases to do what the district wants. |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 1, 2020 18:21:37 GMT -6
coachd5085 see above. It's past the point of feel. I know if we don't hit 90% attendance we don't get near as much funding. That's half of your 19-33% of kids. Based on our trial run that is easily done. I'm not saying going back is right/wrong. I'm just stating schools are weighing their options and the long term impacts of those choices. If it was clear cut then a decision would be made already. You are telling me that your funding is not on a per pupil basis? The 19-33 % number was noting how many schools are considered "rural". Just pointing out that the viewpoint and situation is a minority. Funding is based on asses in chairs and graduation rate. |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 1, 2020 18:25:27 GMT -6
And of that percentage..you feel there is a high percentage of kids who will simply drop out without sports? Come on man.... And EVEN if that is true. I would say that is not representative of most schools. Quoting a paper written by a Washington State University student, 19% of the students in the country attend "rural schools" . In some states that number may sit closer to 33%. Anders4 is explaining our problem. They will sell weed before they lift a finger to do school work. And Here, that jobs is just so they can eat adequately. They will not have success with any form of virtual schooling, and kids will drop out left and right without sports, school activities. These do not have the funds and resources in many cases to do what the district wants. Many small schools are starting to realize this predicament. Big schools might make it. Small ones are almost in a life/death situation. What is good/correct for them now could end them down in 6-12 months. There's a reason everyone is doing whatever they can to try and go back. It's all about money. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2020 18:34:57 GMT -6
Anders4 is explaining our problem. They will sell weed before they lift a finger to do school work. And Here, that jobs is just so they can eat adequately. They will not have success with any form of virtual schooling, and kids will drop out left and right without sports, school activities. These do not have the funds and resources in many cases to do what the district wants. Many small schools are starting to realize this predicament. Big schools might make it. Small ones are almost in a life/death situation. What is good/correct for them now could end them down in 6-12 months. There's a reason everyone is doing whatever they can to try and go back. It's all about money. We take sports and school activities out, We will diminish by 75 pct. Easy. This demographic is harsh. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 1, 2020 19:28:48 GMT -6
You are telling me that your funding is not on a per pupil basis? The 19-33 % number was noting how many schools are considered "rural". Just pointing out that the viewpoint and situation is a minority. Some states use daily attendance % as a qualifier for some state funding. Some use it in the rating of the school/district. Fall below these number for so many consecutive years and the state can step in and takeover. So yes daily attendance is a BIG deal in some states. In districts like mine that are inner city/urban it's a big concern. When kids are caught in the vicious cycle of poverty school might not be that big of a deal to them, give them a little nudge in the opposite way as this whole insane situation is and they aren't coming back or will be sporadic in attending. Why is it so hard for you to believe it's going to effect some schools? After some further thinking and reading, I think the answer to your last question is that in Louisiana the schools are not as heavily funded by property taxes as in some places, and the state has a minimum foundation program from which they fun schools. But basically, I am just very surprised to hear that people believe that high a % of students would drop out or not come to school just because they can't play football. Sure there are some, but as a % of student body, I just don't know. |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 1, 2020 19:40:18 GMT -6
Some states use daily attendance % as a qualifier for some state funding. Some use it in the rating of the school/district. Fall below these number for so many consecutive years and the state can step in and takeover. So yes daily attendance is a BIG deal in some states. In districts like mine that are inner city/urban it's a big concern. When kids are caught in the vicious cycle of poverty school might not be that big of a deal to them, give them a little nudge in the opposite way as this whole insane situation is and they aren't coming back or will be sporadic in attending. Why is it so hard for you to believe it's going to effect some schools? After some further thinking and reading, I think the answer to your last question is that in Louisiana the schools are not as heavily funded by property taxes as in some places, and the state has a minimum foundation program from which they fun schools. But basically, I am just very surprised to hear that people believe that high a % of students would drop out or not come to school just because they can't play football. Sure there are some, but as a % of student body, I just don't know. It’s not just about football. It’s every fall sport activity. Sport or non sport. Those kids won’t come. Small schools will die. Several states have already said without football they will cancel all other school sports and activities for the school year. The revenue they get from football allows them to fund everything else. Yes we are talking about HS still. |
|
|
|
Post by sweep26 on Jul 1, 2020 20:19:59 GMT -6
We better get this covid pandemic figured out PDQ...or we are all going to be in a world of hurt!!
In-person education is critical for all of our students intellectual and social growth. The value of all extra-curricular activities in the overall scope things is very real...for many, many reasons.
Our schools need all of the well-ran extra-curricular activities that they can get. Most importantly...activities bring kids to school!! Successful activities also attract the support of families and community businesses.
As mentioned above, ADA (Average Daily Attendance) is often a factor in State funding formulas and most schools also require major fund raising projects in order to balance budgets, etc. Successful Activities Programs promote the support that many of us rely upon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2020 22:23:29 GMT -6
Some states use daily attendance % as a qualifier for some state funding. Some use it in the rating of the school/district. Fall below these number for so many consecutive years and the state can step in and takeover. So yes daily attendance is a BIG deal in some states. In districts like mine that are inner city/urban it's a big concern. When kids are caught in the vicious cycle of poverty school might not be that big of a deal to them, give them a little nudge in the opposite way as this whole insane situation is and they aren't coming back or will be sporadic in attending. Why is it so hard for you to believe it's going to effect some schools? After some further thinking and reading, I think the answer to your last question is that in Louisiana the schools are not as heavily funded by property taxes as in some places, and the state has a minimum foundation program from which they fun schools. But basically, I am just very surprised to hear that people believe that high a % of students would drop out or not come to school just because they can't play football. Sure there are some, but as a % of student body, I just don't know. Its not a belief. I know. When you walk into house where rat poop is abundant, roaches are everywhere, and air conditioning is not an option nor is locking the door, it becomes very clear. Without the social interaction, the escape... Modern education is not going to keep kids in seats outside of suburbia. In the inner cities, in the poorer parts of anywhere, it ain’t gonna happen. They will flip burgers instead or fix cars, or sell weed, or join a gang.... I am getting pissed. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 1, 2020 22:32:05 GMT -6
After some further thinking and reading, I think the answer to your last question is that in Louisiana the schools are not as heavily funded by property taxes as in some places, and the state has a minimum foundation program from which they fun schools. But basically, I am just very surprised to hear that people believe that high a % of students would drop out or not come to school just because they can't play football. Sure there are some, but as a % of student body, I just don't know. Its not a belief. I know. When you walk into house where rat poop is abundant, roaches are everywhere, and air conditioning is not an option nor is locking the door, it becomes very clear. Without the social interaction, the escape... Modern education is not going to keep kids in seats outside of suburbia. In the inner cities, in the poorer parts of anywhere, it ain’t gonna happen. They will flip burgers instead or fix cars, or sell weed, or join a gang.... I am getting pissed. I too teach kids with those challenges. My point is pure numbers. There simply AREN'T that many kids on your football, basketball, track teams etc that if 100% of them dropped out of school the school would shut down. And I don't believe 100% of them would do that anyway. That is my suggestion. That schools, particularly suburban and urban, will not shutter up because of low attendance due to kids not going to school simply because a sports season is cancelled. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2020 22:45:16 GMT -6
Its not a belief. I know. When you walk into house where rat poop is abundant, roaches are everywhere, and air conditioning is not an option nor is locking the door, it becomes very clear. Without the social interaction, the escape... Modern education is not going to keep kids in seats outside of suburbia. In the inner cities, in the poorer parts of anywhere, it ain’t gonna happen. They will flip burgers instead or fix cars, or sell weed, or join a gang.... I am getting pissed. I too teach kids with those challenges. My point is pure numbers. There simply AREN'T that many kids on your football, basketball, track teams etc that if 100% of them dropped out of school the school would shut down. And I don't believe 100% of them would do that anyway. That is my suggestion. That schools, particularly suburban and urban, will not shutter up because of low attendance due to kids not going to school simply because a sports season is cancelled. A rather large number, pct would rather work than sit in front of a computer and do the school work. Social distancing, face mask, no after school activities, etc..etc..etc...a lot of kids will just say “f-it...” I am not favor of it. My HC is extremely tolerant for many of these reasons. 85-90 pct. minority where I am at. And I would Bet most live in a ghetto/trailer park. And that is being generous. Almost all of the players do. 100 pct drop out? No. But enough to cause real problems? Yup, absolutely. And on top of all that, its about to be taken over by the state. Whatever money is left in the district is about to leave. |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 2, 2020 5:07:29 GMT -6
Its not a belief. I know. When you walk into house where rat poop is abundant, roaches are everywhere, and air conditioning is not an option nor is locking the door, it becomes very clear. Without the social interaction, the escape... Modern education is not going to keep kids in seats outside of suburbia. In the inner cities, in the poorer parts of anywhere, it ain’t gonna happen. They will flip burgers instead or fix cars, or sell weed, or join a gang.... I am getting pissed. I too teach kids with those challenges. My point is pure numbers. There simply AREN'T that many kids on your football, basketball, track teams etc that if 100% of them dropped out of school the school would shut down. And I don't believe 100% of them would do that anyway. That is my suggestion. That schools, particularly suburban and urban, will not shutter up because of low attendance due to kids not going to school simply because a sports season is cancelled. I'm not here to convince you one way or the other. Obviously I don't know your community, and you don't know mine. Suburban schools will be fine. Rural and urban is highly questionable. To deny the possibility of closure due to funding/attendance must mean we are living in completely different worlds. My kids are worried physiological and safety needs on Maslows Hierarchy pyramid. They're worried about the most basic of needs to survive, not reading 'The Scarlet Letter'. After the spring semester my community and surrounding ones know their fate if they go virtual learning. |
|
|
|
Post by utchuckd on Jul 2, 2020 5:36:04 GMT -6
From someone outside of the education world, how much funding would a school need if the kids aren't there every day?
|
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jul 2, 2020 5:57:07 GMT -6
Its not a belief. I know. When you walk into house where rat poop is abundant, roaches are everywhere, and air conditioning is not an option nor is locking the door, it becomes very clear. Without the social interaction, the escape... Modern education is not going to keep kids in seats outside of suburbia. In the inner cities, in the poorer parts of anywhere, it ain’t gonna happen. They will flip burgers instead or fix cars, or sell weed, or join a gang.... I am getting pissed. I too teach kids with those challenges. My point is pure numbers. There simply AREN'T that many kids on your football, basketball, track teams etc that if 100% of them dropped out of school the school would shut down. And I don't believe 100% of them would do that anyway. That is my suggestion. That schools, particularly suburban and urban, will not shutter up because of low attendance due to kids not going to school simply because a sports season is cancelled. I don't think you're thinking of the ripple effect. It's not just about the football team its all the activities that surround it. If there is no football there won't be basketball or cheerleading or band and so on. The first school I coached at will be one that consolidates if there are no sports/activities. Not a doubt in my mind |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jul 2, 2020 5:59:46 GMT -6
From someone outside of the education world, how much funding would a school need if the kids aren't there every day? Not much. Which is why they would lay people off. How many janitors, lunch ladies, teachers and secretaries do you need if the kids aren't there? Or Admin? The admin trying to save their own a$$es may be what saves athletics |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 2, 2020 7:02:15 GMT -6
I too teach kids with those challenges. My point is pure numbers. There simply AREN'T that many kids on your football, basketball, track teams etc that if 100% of them dropped out of school the school would shut down. And I don't believe 100% of them would do that anyway. That is my suggestion. That schools, particularly suburban and urban, will not shutter up because of low attendance due to kids not going to school simply because a sports season is cancelled. I don't think you're thinking of the ripple effect. It's not just about the football team its all the activities that surround it. If there is no football there won't be basketball or cheerleading or band and so on. The first school I coached at will be one that consolidates if there are no sports/activities. Not a doubt in my mind I'm having a hard time understanding this concept. Are you at a public school? I don't see how missing a season of football will lead to a catastrophe during which the local schools will be eliminated and children will be left with no educational opportunities. I also doubt that losing sports and other activities will cause a dropout absentee rate that would threaten such a collapse. |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jul 2, 2020 7:10:35 GMT -6
I don't think you're thinking of the ripple effect. It's not just about the football team its all the activities that surround it. If there is no football there won't be basketball or cheerleading or band and so on. The first school I coached at will be one that consolidates if there are no sports/activities. Not a doubt in my mind I'm having a hard time understanding this concept. Are you at a public school? I don't see how missing a season of football will lead to a catastrophe during which the local schools will be eliminated and children will be left with no educational opportunities. I also doubt that losing sports and other activities will cause a dropout absentee rate that would threaten such a collapse. Once again, this isn't all about football but all activities. Small public schools will struggle here. I never said anything about the kids not getting educational opportunities either. I said that schools will consolidate with other schools. So jobs will be lost and schools will be closed as a result. Large schools will see a drop but probably won't affect them as badly depending on your location I guess. I know 4 schools right now off the top of my head that would consolidate if they got rid of activities such as football. A lot of kids will just get their GED I'm having a hard time understanding how you don't get that concept |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 7:15:19 GMT -6
I too teach kids with those challenges. My point is pure numbers. There simply AREN'T that many kids on your football, basketball, track teams etc that if 100% of them dropped out of school the school would shut down. And I don't believe 100% of them would do that anyway. That is my suggestion. That schools, particularly suburban and urban, will not shutter up because of low attendance due to kids not going to school simply because a sports season is cancelled. I'm not here to convince you one way or the other. Obviously I don't know your community, and you don't know mine. Suburban schools will be fine. Rural and urban is highly questionable. To deny the possibility of closure due to funding/attendance must mean we are living in completely different worlds. My kids are worried physiological and safety needs on Maslows Hierarchy pyramid. They're worried about the most basic of needs to survive, not reading 'The Scarlet Letter'. After the spring semester my community and surrounding ones know their fate if they go virtual learning.I don't doubt the highlighted portion of your post. I would agree that school systems in communities that suffer from many of the ailments typical of low socieo-economic standing will have great difficulty implementing "distance learning" and the community as a whole could possibly reject the notion to the point where there are going concern issues. Because distance learning is 100% of the student body not utilizing the buildings. It is a complete shift in the paradigm and structure of public education. There will definitely be growing pains, and the factors seen in those communities aren't really conducive to handling growing pains. I think that is different than if schools open doors, operate under guidelines and restrictions, and don't offer extra curriculars. I mean one of the foundational concerns on Maslows pyramid is food and shelter, and the open school buildings provide both regardless of football correct? |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 2, 2020 7:22:08 GMT -6
I'm not here to convince you one way or the other. Obviously I don't know your community, and you don't know mine. Suburban schools will be fine. Rural and urban is highly questionable. To deny the possibility of closure due to funding/attendance must mean we are living in completely different worlds. My kids are worried physiological and safety needs on Maslows Hierarchy pyramid. They're worried about the most basic of needs to survive, not reading 'The Scarlet Letter'. After the spring semester my community and surrounding ones know their fate if they go virtual learning.I don't doubt the highlighted portion of your post. I would agree that school systems in communities that suffer from many of the ailments typical of low socieo-economic standing will have great difficulty implementing "distance learning" and the community as a whole could possibly reject the notion to the point where there are going concern issues. Because distance learning is 100% of the student body not utilizing the buildings. It is a complete shift in the paradigm and structure of public education. There will definitely be growing pains, and the factors seen in those communities aren't really conducive to handling growing pains. I think that is different than if schools open doors, operate under guidelines and restrictions, and don't offer extra curriculars. I mean one of the foundational concerns on Maslows pyramid is food and shelter, and the open school buildings provide both regardless of football correct? Correct. School being open as ‘normal’ will help meet those kids basics needs. I would assume if the schools are open then sports & activities will resume. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 7:24:16 GMT -6
I'm having a hard time understanding this concept. Are you at a public school? I don't see how missing a season of football will lead to a catastrophe during which the local schools will be eliminated and children will be left with no educational opportunities. I also doubt that losing sports and other activities will cause a dropout absentee rate that would threaten such a collapse. Once again, this isn't all about football but all activities. Small public schools will struggle here. I never said anything about the kids not getting educational opportunities either. I said that schools will consolidate with other schools. So jobs will be lost and schools will be closed as a result. Large schools will see a drop but probably won't affect them as badly depending on your location I guess. I know 4 schools right now off the top of my head that would consolidate if they got rid of activities such as football. A lot of kids will just get their GED I'm having a hard time understanding how you don't get that concept I am having a hard time because there are not any numbers involved. If what you are saying is correct, then almost every athlete, cheerleader, etc has dropped out of school (or simply quit attending and no truancy support existed) when they suffered a season ending injury? I just don't see a Tuba player saying "what..I can't stomp in place and kill the grass in our 7 minute performance on Fridays? Screw it, I am not going to school" I am pretty sure the Treasure of the French Club is not quitting school if they don't hold French Club Meetings. Coach when you say you know 4 schools that would consolidate, do you mean that the sole reason those schools exist is so that each can have its own athletic teams? That if there were no athletic teams, the LEA would consolidate into one school (regardless of attendance?) THAT I could see, but I think that is a different argument. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 7:25:56 GMT -6
I don't doubt the highlighted portion of your post. I would agree that school systems in communities that suffer from many of the ailments typical of low socieo-economic standing will have great difficulty implementing "distance learning" and the community as a whole could possibly reject the notion to the point where there are going concern issues. Because distance learning is 100% of the student body not utilizing the buildings. It is a complete shift in the paradigm and structure of public education. There will definitely be growing pains, and the factors seen in those communities aren't really conducive to handling growing pains. I think that is different than if schools open doors, operate under guidelines and restrictions, and don't offer extra curriculars. I mean one of the foundational concerns on Maslows pyramid is food and shelter, and the open school buildings provide both regardless of football correct? Correct. School being open as ‘normal’ will help meet those kids basics needs. I would assume if the schools are open then sports & activities will resume. I think your assumption is incorrect, and that is what I thought was being discussed in this thread. The fact that these schools and state associations are looking at not having athletics but having school buildings open. |
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Jul 2, 2020 7:40:08 GMT -6
NJ delaying the season now.
|
|
