I don't think anyone coould say for sure that private schools would start recruiting all of the athletes but the reality is that they could if they so decide to and at that point there would be no recourse. I think the argument is that because the private schools are not held to the same requirements as public schools they should not be allowed in. So not a question of if they would, the reality is they could. Personally I could care less what happens in highschool sports but apparently the time to make a choice is now. Not after say jesuit come thru and takes the title in Basketball too. There was definitely some moaning and groaining after the soccer one.

Many posts are treating private schools like collegiate schools where recruitment is the norm. I doubt that the majority of us that have chosen to send our children to private schools are doing so because of athletic prowess. And, I sincerely doubt that these institutions will alter their standards just to recruit for athletics. Academic standards are taken very seriously in the area's top private schools. Their intrinsic academic and social requirements, which are longstanding and not going to change, make the argument that these schools are not held to the same requirements as the public schools insignificant to me. They have higher standards set forth by their boards and academic admission's staff. It really is about the education and the things our children are exposed to whether that be in the classroom or that be religious issues that we choose to send our children to alternative avenues of school. I am proud of the fact that 20% of my son's school is on some form of financial assistance and has the endowment and where with all to provide such. The school which produced UT's top defensive player this past season, Boz Scaggs and many of the city's leaders is open to all and not just the have nots. We really could care less about admission to the UIL or not. We are not in it for the hope of an athletic scholarship. Academic scholarship is a different story...

It really doesn't matter what this vote ends up. Private schools are in UIL and they will stay in because it is illegal to keep them out. That is why the UIL backed down before and allowed Jesuit in. They knew the "good ole boy" way of doing business was illegal. It's no different today. The past 5 to 6 years have proven the point. Private schools compete within the UIL without dominating sports. The boys who played for Jesuit who left FC Dallas actually proves the point. They felt their education was more important than playing soccer. Were they on some form of financial assistance, only they and the school knows for sure and anything else is speculation which is irrelevant anyway. Those students either made their grades or they didn't. And if they didn't then they didn't play. They went to Jesuit to get a higher quality education than they felt they could get in DISD.

The real funny thing about it is now with the new Academy rule these players would not be able to play high school sports anyway. So for soccer this ruling is moot as far as recruiting many of the top soccer players.

This argument has been around a long while all across the country and in many sports. Some of the nation's top prep schools are also have some of the most competitive athletic programs: Mater De in California, Thomas Acquinas in Florida, De Matha in DC, Country Day in Detroit, etc. These schools have outstanding academic programs and also recruit the best talent for their target sports with scholarships. They also compete against the best talent, public and private. Fact is, sports is a business even at high school. It attracts booster money in public schools and endowment money for private schools. If your kid were offered a full ride to play ball for a great academic school, wouldn't you take it?? It's not like public schools aren't recruiting as well. Anyone know whatever happened to that quarterback from OK that Carroll brought in after his parents were caught in the recruiting trap??

mediocampista wrote:This argument has been around a long while all across the country and in many sports. Some of the nation's top prep schools are also have some of the most competitive athletic programs: Mater De in California, Thomas Acquinas in Florida, De Matha in DC, Country Day in Detroit, etc. These schools have outstanding academic programs and also recruit the best talent for their target sports with scholarships. They also compete against the best talent, public and private. Fact is, sports is a business even at high school. It attracts booster money in public schools and endowment money for private schools. If your kid were offered a full ride to play ball for a great academic school, wouldn't you take it?? It's not like public schools aren't recruiting as well. Anyone know whatever happened to that quarterback from OK that Carroll brought in after his parents were caught in the recruiting trap??

The quarterback is at Arizona on a football scholarship.

Here is another twist on this. Homeschooling is under law considered private school. So are all the homeschool kids going to be allowed to play at public school or form teams and play UIL?

my2cents wrote:Here is another twist on this. Homeschooling is under law considered private school. So are all the homeschool kids going to be allowed to play at public school or form teams and play UIL?

Yes. And in my opinion, from the pool of homeschool kids that I know out there who would love to play UIL sports and really have some talent, the public school system should be voting YES to SB1214 just so that they can get their hands on them.

my2cents wrote:Here is another twist on this. Homeschooling is under law considered private school. So are all the homeschool kids going to be allowed to play at public school or form teams and play UIL?

They have been doing that for a while. They play both public & private - they just don't get into the playoffs.

http://www.hsaa.org/

soccergrinder wrote:It really doesn't matter what this vote ends up. Private schools are in UIL and they will stay in because it is illegal to keep them out. That is why the UIL backed down before and allowed Jesuit in. They knew the "good ole boy" way of doing business was illegal. It's no different today. The past 5 to 6 years have proven the point. Private schools compete within the UIL without dominating sports. The boys who played for Jesuit who left FC Dallas actually proves the point. They felt their education was more important than playing soccer. Were they on some form of financial assistance, only they and the school knows for sure and anything else is speculation which is irrelevant anyway. Those students either made their grades or they didn't. And if they didn't then they didn't play. They went to Jesuit to get a higher quality education than they felt they could get in DISD.

The real funny thing about it is now with the new Academy rule these players would not be able to play high school sports anyway. So for soccer this ruling is moot as far as recruiting many of the top soccer players.

Why is it illegal? That is not why the UIL allowed Jesuit in. There was a law suit and UIL did not want to have a long drawn out legal battle over this. A compromise was made and specific rules were put into place (self governing).

You are funny...that is not why the boys left FCD...they all had committed to their colleges and wanted to represent their schools. Had nothing to do with academics.

jeffm wrote:

my2cents wrote:Here is another twist on this. Homeschooling is under law considered private school. So are all the homeschool kids going to be allowed to play at public school or form teams and play UIL?

They have been doing that for a while. They play both public & private - they just don't get into the playoffs.

http://www.hsaa.org/

They play those schools in pre-season tournaments only, after that they only play each other. I know all about it. Did it for two years.They have a great national tournament in OK every year. I gaurantee you that some of those teams would have people screaming if they joined most HS districts.

my2cents wrote:

jeffm wrote:

my2cents wrote:Here is another twist on this. Homeschooling is under law considered private school. So are all the homeschool kids going to be allowed to play at public school or form teams and play UIL?

They have been doing that for a while. They play both public & private - they just don't get into the playoffs.

http://www.hsaa.org/

They play those schools in pre-season tournaments only, after that they only play each other. I know all about it. Did it for two years.They have a great national tournament in OK every year. I gaurantee you that some of those teams would have people screaming if they joined most HS districts.

Not sure about your statement, at least for soccer. Right now I only know of one organization for homeschool students in the metroplex, there are others for other sports. The soccer plays whoever/whenever a team will schedule them, private mainly in the fall winter before xmas, public primarily after until the end of Feb. I think public schools avoid playing them during district play. DD has been at this 2 years as well. Your right though, depending on the district, they could cause problems.

jeffm wrote:

my2cents wrote:

jeffm wrote:

my2cents wrote:Here is another twist on this. Homeschooling is under law considered private school. So are all the homeschool kids going to be allowed to play at public school or form teams and play UIL?

They have been doing that for a while. They play both public & private - they just don't get into the playoffs.

http://www.hsaa.org/

They play those schools in pre-season tournaments only, after that they only play each other. I know all about it. Did it for two years.They have a great national tournament in OK every year. I gaurantee you that some of those teams would have people screaming if they joined most HS districts.

Not sure about your statement, at least for soccer. Right now I only know of one organization for homeschool students in the metroplex, there are others for other sports. The soccer plays whoever/whenever a team will schedule them, private mainly in the fall winter before xmas, public primarily after until the end of Feb. I think public schools avoid playing them during district play. DD has been at this 2 years as well. Your right though, depending on the district, they could cause problems.

Sorry about the lack of clarification. That was Hoops.

Of course not. Show me right now where I said that.
The other poster is implying that they can just take any stud athlete and put them into a private school. That's only possible if their grades and test scores are very high. 80% of public school students don't have the grades or academic ability to keep up in private school, therefore you can eliminate at least 80% of the stud athletes.

In my high school, we had a stud football player who got his high school degree and he literally couldn't read. That would never happen in a private school.[/quote]


80% of public school students can't make it academically in private schools??? I'm glad to see elitist snobbery is alive and well in DFW. This sounds like a nice rationalization for paying all that private school tuition money. Private schools exist to make Mommy and Daddy feel that their BBs and DDs are special. Top individuals are going to be sucessful whether thay are in public or private schools.

Private schools shouldn't be allowed in the UIL for one reason and one reason only. THEY DON'T PLAY BY THE EXACT SAME RULES AS EVERYONE ELSE! IT'S NOT FAIR WHEN YOU START MAKING EXCEPTIONS FOR SOME SCHOOLS!!!! WHEN YOUR ATTENDANCE ZONE IS DFW, THAT'S NOT FAIR, PERIOD.

onetenguy wrote:[color=red][b]Private schools exist to make Mommy and Daddy feel that their BBs and DDs are special. Top individuals are going to be sucessful whether thay are in public or private schools.

I’m pretty sure we all feel our children are special, at least special to us. I have two boys and they are both very special individuals in my heart. Whether they go to a public school or a private school they would be just as special to me. I have to agree with you though on this. Top academic individuals will do just fine whether they go to public or private institutions. However, having been a college professor for the last 30 years I can tell you the higher the level they are pushed to, the higher the level they will achieve. So while they may do just fine in a public school they probably could have done better in a private school. Now that is on an average because there are some excellent public schools and then again there are some really bad public schools. So all public schools are not the same. The question to really ask is not about the top individuals, but about the median level students. Therein lays one of the real differences between private education and public education. Median level students do much better in private schools than public on an average.

Here are some statistics.

DISD Data (http://www.dallasisd.org/eval/evaluation/atglance2010/EA09-107-4-At-a-Glance-Postsecondary-Outcomes.pdf)
Data from the NSC show that 38% of students (2,440 of 6,370) who graduated in 2007-08 were enrolled in a postsecondary institution. Of these, 17% were enrolled in four-year colleges and 21% in two-year colleges.

Jesuit Dallas Data (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesuit_College_Preparatory_School_of_Dallas)
The class of 2006 attended 85 schools; 52% attended private colleges/universities; 46% attended public colleges/universities ... That would be 98% go to college.

onetenguy wrote:Of course not. Show me right now where I said that.
The other poster is implying that they can just take any stud athlete and put them into a private school. That's only possible if their grades and test scores are very high. 80% of public school students don't have the grades or academic ability to keep up in private school, therefore you can eliminate at least 80% of the stud athletes.

In my high school, we had a stud football player who got his high school degree and he literally couldn't read. That would never happen in a private school.

80% of public school students can't make it academically in private schools??? I'm glad to see elitist snobbery is alive and well in DFW. This sounds like a nice rationalization for paying all that private school tuition money. Private schools exist to make Mommy and Daddy feel that their BBs and DDs are special. Top individuals are going to be sucessful whether thay are in public or private schools.

Private schools shouldn't be allowed in the UIL for one reason and one reason only. THEY DON'T PLAY BY THE EXACT SAME RULES AS EVERYONE ELSE! IT'S NOT FAIR WHEN YOU START MAKING EXCEPTIONS FOR SOME SCHOOLS!!!! WHEN YOUR ATTENDANCE ZONE IS DFW, THAT'S NOT FAIR, PERIOD.[/quote]

I have lots of teachers in my family and lots of friends that teach. That is why my kids go to private school. I am educated on the subject. While I do feel that my kids would do very well in public school also, they do better in private school. I don't have to worry about bullying, gangs, bad influences from kids that don't want to be there, drugs, etc. In private school, if a kid is a disruption to the rest of the class, he is kicked out of school. Unfortunately, in public schools, teachers have very little power.
And yes, the kids in private school want to be there and they want to learn. In public school, many times the smart, ambitious kids have to fight through all of the bullying and name calling because they are smart.
One of my friends actually quit teaching at a public junior high because he spent all of his time breaking up fights and dealing with parents that could care less that their kid was getting in trouble every day at school.
I have a Korean friend that moved to the US from Korea at the start of high school (public school). He was shocked at the attitude of American students. As long as the Americans "passed" their tests they are happy.(Not all, but most). It's not like that in private school.
You sound like a very bitter person.

FCdad wrote:

onetenguy wrote:Of course not. Show me right now where I said that.
The other poster is implying that they can just take any stud athlete and put them into a private school. That's only possible if their grades and test scores are very high. 80% of public school students don't have the grades or academic ability to keep up in private school, therefore you can eliminate at least 80% of the stud athletes.

In my high school, we had a stud football player who got his high school degree and he literally couldn't read. That would never happen in a private school.

80% of public school students can't make it academically in private schools??? I'm glad to see elitist snobbery is alive and well in DFW. This sounds like a nice rationalization for paying all that private school tuition money. Private schools exist to make Mommy and Daddy feel that their BBs and DDs are special. Top individuals are going to be sucessful whether thay are in public or private schools.

Private schools shouldn't be allowed in the UIL for one reason and one reason only. THEY DON'T PLAY BY THE EXACT SAME RULES AS EVERYONE ELSE! IT'S NOT FAIR WHEN YOU START MAKING EXCEPTIONS FOR SOME SCHOOLS!!!! WHEN YOUR ATTENDANCE ZONE IS DFW, THAT'S NOT FAIR, PERIOD.

I have lots of teachers in my family and lots of friends that teach. That is why my kids go to private school. I am educated on the subject. While I do feel that my kids would do very well in public school also, they do better in private school. I don't have to worry about bullying, gangs, bad influences from kids that don't want to be there, drugs, etc. In private school, if a kid is a disruption to the rest of the class, he is kicked out of school. Unfortunately, in public schools, teachers have very little power.
And yes, the kids in private school want to be there and they want to learn. In public school, many times the smart, ambitious kids have to fight through all of the bullying and name calling because they are smart.
One of my friends actually quit teaching at a public junior high because he spent all of his time breaking up fights and dealing with parents that could care less that their kid was getting in trouble every day at school.
I have a Korean friend that moved to the US from Korea at the start of high school (public school). He was shocked at the attitude of American students. As long as the Americans "passed" their tests they are happy.(Not all, but most). It's not like that in private school.
You sound like a very bitter person.[/quote]

Thanks for the laughs. No bullying at private schools??? I see that you haven't been around the Jesuit boys soccer team the last few years. NO drugs in private schools? Heck, the well off and rich kids can afford the drugs better than the DISD students or is alcohol the drug of choice for the well off?? I'm bitter??? Better that then being a clueless private school parent with their head stuck in the sand. LOL!!!

soccergrinder wrote:

onetenguy wrote:[color=red][b]Private schools exist to make Mommy and Daddy feel that their BBs and DDs are special. Top individuals are going to be sucessful whether thay are in public or private schools.

I’m pretty sure we all feel our children are special, at least special to us. I have two boys and they are both very special individuals in my heart. Whether they go to a public school or a private school they would be just as special to me. I have to agree with you though on this. Top academic individuals will do just fine whether they go to public or private institutions. However, having been a college professor for the last 30 years I can tell you the higher the level they are pushed to, the higher the level they will achieve. So while they may do just fine in a public school they probably could have done better in a private school. Now that is on an average because there are some excellent public schools and then again there are some really bad public schools. So all public schools are not the same. The question to really ask is not about the top individuals, but about the median level students. Therein lays one of the real differences between private education and public education. Median level students do much better in private schools than public on an average.

Here are some statistics.

DISD Data (http://www.dallasisd.org/eval/evaluation/atglance2010/EA09-107-4-At-a-Glance-Postsecondary-Outcomes.pdf)
Data from the NSC show that 38% of students (2,440 of 6,370) who graduated in 2007-08 were enrolled in a postsecondary institution. Of these, 17% were enrolled in four-year colleges and 21% in two-year colleges.

Jesuit Dallas Data (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesuit_College_Preparatory_School_of_Dallas)
The class of 2006 attended 85 schools; 52% attended private colleges/universities; 46% attended public colleges/universities ... That would be 98% go to college.

Gee, let's compare the worst school district in DFW with one of the top private schools in DFW. That sounds fair. LOL!!! Why don't you put some stats up comparing the Jesuit "Recruiters" with SLC, Keller, Grapevine/Colleyville, Lewisville and the other top public schools districts? Oh wait, that might not prove your point as well. Oh, wait what about Highland Park??? Darn, there goes the comparison........

onetenguy wrote:

soccergrinder wrote:

onetenguy wrote:[color=red][b]Private schools exist to make Mommy and Daddy feel that their BBs and DDs are special. Top individuals are going to be sucessful whether thay are in public or private schools.

I’m pretty sure we all feel our children are special, at least special to us. I have two boys and they are both very special individuals in my heart. Whether they go to a public school or a private school they would be just as special to me. I have to agree with you though on this. Top academic individuals will do just fine whether they go to public or private institutions. However, having been a college professor for the last 30 years I can tell you the higher the level they are pushed to, the higher the level they will achieve. So while they may do just fine in a public school they probably could have done better in a private school. Now that is on an average because there are some excellent public schools and then again there are some really bad public schools. So all public schools are not the same. The question to really ask is not about the top individuals, but about the median level students. Therein lays one of the real differences between private education and public education. Median level students do much better in private schools than public on an average.

Here are some statistics.

DISD Data (http://www.dallasisd.org/eval/evaluation/atglance2010/EA09-107-4-At-a-Glance-Postsecondary-Outcomes.pdf)
Data from the NSC show that 38% of students (2,440 of 6,370) who graduated in 2007-08 were enrolled in a postsecondary institution. Of these, 17% were enrolled in four-year colleges and 21% in two-year colleges.

Jesuit Dallas Data (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesuit_College_Preparatory_School_of_Dallas)
The class of 2006 attended 85 schools; 52% attended private colleges/universities; 46% attended public colleges/universities ... That would be 98% go to college.

Gee, let's compare the worst school district in DFW with one of the top private schools in DFW. That sounds fair. LOL!!! Why don't you put some stats up comparing the Jesuit "Recruiters" with SLC, Keller, Grapevine/Colleyville, Lewisville and the other top public schools districts? Oh wait, that might not prove your point as well. Oh, wait what about Highland Park??? Darn, there goes the comparison........

You are the one making bad comparisons. Are you really going to use Highland Park as your public school for comparisons? Highland Park is not even similiar to other public schools. For starters, Highland Park has a 4.5 million dollar indoor practice facility for football... and that's just the tip of the iceberg. With a school like that, those kids don't need to go to private school.

If you disagree with the guys post, then let's see your stats/research.

onetenguy wrote:

soccergrinder wrote:

onetenguy wrote:[color=red][b]Private schools exist to make Mommy and Daddy feel that their BBs and DDs are special. Top individuals are going to be sucessful whether thay are in public or private schools.

I’m pretty sure we all feel our children are special, at least special to us. I have two boys and they are both very special individuals in my heart. Whether they go to a public school or a private school they would be just as special to me. I have to agree with you though on this. Top academic individuals will do just fine whether they go to public or private institutions. However, having been a college professor for the last 30 years I can tell you the higher the level they are pushed to, the higher the level they will achieve. So while they may do just fine in a public school they probably could have done better in a private school. Now that is on an average because there are some excellent public schools and then again there are some really bad public schools. So all public schools are not the same. The question to really ask is not about the top individuals, but about the median level students. Therein lays one of the real differences between private education and public education. Median level students do much better in private schools than public on an average.

Here are some statistics.

DISD Data (http://www.dallasisd.org/eval/evaluation/atglance2010/EA09-107-4-At-a-Glance-Postsecondary-Outcomes.pdf)
Data from the NSC show that 38% of students (2,440 of 6,370) who graduated in 2007-08 were enrolled in a postsecondary institution. Of these, 17% were enrolled in four-year colleges and 21% in two-year colleges.

Jesuit Dallas Data (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesuit_College_Preparatory_School_of_Dallas)
The class of 2006 attended 85 schools; 52% attended private colleges/universities; 46% attended public colleges/universities ... That would be 98% go to college.

Gee, let's compare the worst school district in DFW with one of the top private schools in DFW. That sounds fair. LOL!!! Why don't you put some stats up comparing the Jesuit "Recruiters" with SLC, Keller, Grapevine/Colleyville, Lewisville and the other top public schools districts? Oh wait, that might not prove your point as well. Oh, wait what about Highland Park??? Darn, there goes the comparison........

I used DISD because I live in Dallas. Jesuit is in Dallas. My boys, if they went to public school, would go to W.T. White. We live within walking distance for both Jesuit and W.T. White. So I compared the things that would directly effect MY children. I encourage you to do the same. You want to compare other schools then go for it. However, I have already made my point. I have no doubt that my sons would have done fine at W.T. White and would have been in the 17% that went to a four year college. As I said in my post and you chose to ignore, there are some great public schools in the DFW area. Try not to be so myopic.

If you asked parents of children in DISD if their kids could go to private school and money was not an issue, 99% would say absolutely, because it would give them a better chance to be successful.

Too many people assume the rich, snob cliche when you say private school. Fact is I know many parents (not the majority but a good number) who both work or work multiple jobs, and skip out on vacations, new vehicles etc. so their kids can get a great education.

If you think about it, many of the parents who plow money into select soccer on their average son or daughter would be better served putting that money in a top notch private school.

Of course the top notch students will be successful regardless of where they are, its the middle of the road kids who are ignored in many public schools because they are not the smartest or on the lower end, which is where most public schools focus their attention when they are not studying for TAKS.

stangs wrote:If you asked parents of children in DISD if their kids could go to private school and money was not an issue, 99% would say absolutely, because it would give them a better chance to be successful.

Too many people assume the rich, snob cliche when you say private school. Fact is I know many parents (not the majority but a good number) who both work or work multiple jobs, and skip out on vacations, new vehicles etc. so their kids can get a great education.

If you think about it, many of the parents who plow money into select soccer on their average son or daughter would be better served putting that money in a top notch private school.Of course the top notch students will be successful regardless of where they are, its the middle of the road kids who are ignored in many public schools because they are not the smartest or on the lower end, which is where most public schools focus their attention when they are not studying for TAKS.

Thats hilarious The 2-3K most people spend on select soccer would not even make a down payment on one year's tuition at a top notch private school.

FCdad wrote:

onetenguy wrote:

soccergrinder wrote:

onetenguy wrote:[color=red][b]Private schools exist to make Mommy and Daddy feel that their BBs and DDs are special. Top individuals are going to be sucessful whether thay are in public or private schools.

I’m pretty sure we all feel our children are special, at least special to us. I have two boys and they are both very special individuals in my heart. Whether they go to a public school or a private school they would be just as special to me. I have to agree with you though on this. Top academic individuals will do just fine whether they go to public or private institutions. However, having been a college professor for the last 30 years I can tell you the higher the level they are pushed to, the higher the level they will achieve. So while they may do just fine in a public school they probably could have done better in a private school. Now that is on an average because there are some excellent public schools and then again there are some really bad public schools. So all public schools are not the same. The question to really ask is not about the top individuals, but about the median level students. Therein lays one of the real differences between private education and public education. Median level students do much better in private schools than public on an average.

Here are some statistics.

DISD Data (http://www.dallasisd.org/eval/evaluation/atglance2010/EA09-107-4-At-a-Glance-Postsecondary-Outcomes.pdf)
Data from the NSC show that 38% of students (2,440 of 6,370) who graduated in 2007-08 were enrolled in a postsecondary institution. Of these, 17% were enrolled in four-year colleges and 21% in two-year colleges.

Jesuit Dallas Data (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesuit_College_Preparatory_School_of_Dallas)
The class of 2006 attended 85 schools; 52% attended private colleges/universities; 46% attended public colleges/universities ... That would be 98% go to college.

Gee, let's compare the worst school district in DFW with one of the top private schools in DFW. That sounds fair. LOL!!! Why don't you put some stats up comparing the Jesuit "Recruiters" with SLC, Keller, Grapevine/Colleyville, Lewisville and the other top public schools districts? Oh wait, that might not prove your point as well. Oh, wait what about Highland Park??? Darn, there goes the comparison........

You are the one making bad comparisons. Are you really going to use Highland Park as your public school for comparisons? Highland Park is not even similiar to other public schools. For starters, Highland Park has a 4.5 million dollar indoor practice facility for football... and that's just the tip of the iceberg. With a school like that, those kids don't need to go to private school.

If you disagree with the guys post, then let's see your stats/research.

Nobody "needs" to go to private schools in Texas. I guess if you live in Dallas proper, then you "need" to go to a private school. Personally, I think it's just a status thing, so mommy and daddy can claim superiority over the great unwashed masses (my apology to the great Blackie Sherrod for using his great words).

Oh well, I tire of this debate - you can never change elitist's opinions as they won't listen to anyone questioning their long held beliefs. Please keep on thinking your kids are better prepared than everyone else just because of their private school education. LOL!

Some people send their kids to private school for religious reasons.

onetenguy wrote:

FCdad wrote:

onetenguy wrote:

soccergrinder wrote:

onetenguy wrote:[color=red][b]Private schools exist to make Mommy and Daddy feel that their BBs and DDs are special. Top individuals are going to be sucessful whether thay are in public or private schools.

I’m pretty sure we all feel our children are special, at least special to us. I have two boys and they are both very special individuals in my heart. Whether they go to a public school or a private school they would be just as special to me. I have to agree with you though on this. Top academic individuals will do just fine whether they go to public or private institutions. However, having been a college professor for the last 30 years I can tell you the higher the level they are pushed to, the higher the level they will achieve. So while they may do just fine in a public school they probably could have done better in a private school. Now that is on an average because there are some excellent public schools and then again there are some really bad public schools. So all public schools are not the same. The question to really ask is not about the top individuals, but about the median level students. Therein lays one of the real differences between private education and public education. Median level students do much better in private schools than public on an average.

Here are some statistics.

DISD Data (http://www.dallasisd.org/eval/evaluation/atglance2010/EA09-107-4-At-a-Glance-Postsecondary-Outcomes.pdf)
Data from the NSC show that 38% of students (2,440 of 6,370) who graduated in 2007-08 were enrolled in a postsecondary institution. Of these, 17% were enrolled in four-year colleges and 21% in two-year colleges.

Jesuit Dallas Data (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesuit_College_Preparatory_School_of_Dallas)
The class of 2006 attended 85 schools; 52% attended private colleges/universities; 46% attended public colleges/universities ... That would be 98% go to college.

Gee, let's compare the worst school district in DFW with one of the top private schools in DFW. That sounds fair. LOL!!! Why don't you put some stats up comparing the Jesuit "Recruiters" with SLC, Keller, Grapevine/Colleyville, Lewisville and the other top public schools districts? Oh wait, that might not prove your point as well. Oh, wait what about Highland Park??? Darn, there goes the comparison........

You are the one making bad comparisons. Are you really going to use Highland Park as your public school for comparisons? Highland Park is not even similiar to other public schools. For starters, Highland Park has a 4.5 million dollar indoor practice facility for football... and that's just the tip of the iceberg. With a school like that, those kids don't need to go to private school.

If you disagree with the guys post, then let's see your stats/research.

Nobody "needs" to go to private schools in Texas. I guess if you live in Dallas proper, then you "need" to go to a private school. Personally, I think it's just a status thing, so mommy and daddy can claim superiority over the great unwashed masses (my apology to the great Blackie Sherrod for using his great words).

Oh well, I tire of this debate - you can never change elitist's opinions as they won't listen to anyone questioning their long held beliefs. Please keep on thinking your kids are better prepared than everyone else just because of their private school education. LOL!

Why does it make someone an elitist if they want the best education possible for their children? Is it wrong to want the best for your child? It's like saying you are an elitist if you pay and send your kids to play select soccer instead of letting them play rec- it's up to each individual parent and child, and there is no right or wrong.

And like the poster above commented, I am actually more excited my child can talk about Jesus at school, that is what is most important to my family and that is my choice.

So did they vote?

soccerrus2 wrote:So did they vote?

Nope! So, they have to wait until 2013 to bring it up again. The other side tried to hide it in another bill, but, that didn't work either.

onetenguy wrote:

Nobody "needs" to go to private schools in Texas. I guess if you live in Dallas proper, then you "need" to go to a private school. Personally, I think it's just a status thing, so mommy and daddy can claim superiority over the great unwashed masses (my apology to the great Blackie Sherrod for using his great words).

Oh well, I tire of this debate - you can never change elitist's opinions as they won't listen to anyone questioning their long held beliefs. Please keep on thinking your kids are better prepared than everyone else just because of their private school education. LOL!

It's so sad that some people find it threatening if someone does something different than they would have done. There is actually room in the world for kids to go to public schools, private schools and be home schooled. There is no right way. It is an individual choice. You have chosen public school and I applaud you for it. I would never home school my child. But to those that would, more power to them. I am not threatened by them because they are different. I revel in the diversity of life choices and think humanity is better for it. I chose private school for a variety of reasons. If it makes you sleep better at night to call me elitist to justify your beliefs then go for it. I attended public schools in the DFW area growing up so I have had experience on both sides of the coin (private & public). I have been a college instructor for 30 years so I know a little bit about education. The most important thing about education is not where you go to school, its that you do go to school and you are surrounded by those who love you and encourage you to succeed. I have no doubt you have done the right thing for your child and that I have done the right thing for mine.