shouldn't you be happy????Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
So it's pick and choose public education. The classroom isn't good enough, nor are the kids within the school, but they're good enough to play football with.
backintexas2013 said:
Funny the Teachers are against this. Wonder why?
They want kids they teach in their UIL activities?backintexas2013 said:
Funny the Teachers are against this. Wonder why?
I don't see the two being similar.BMX Bandit said:
It is.
But earlier today it was said if the student wasn't good enough to be taught by Tanya, then they can't play sports there.
Going to a special magnet school is no different than being homeschooled with regard to their relationship to the sports team at a school they are zoned to
Tanya 93 said:They want kids they teach in their UIL activities?backintexas2013 said:
Funny the Teachers are against this. Wonder why?
This thread is pretty enlightening when it comes to the teachers' responses. Some of the language is actually a bit disturbing. You don't own the activities, the school or the children. You work for the citizens of the state. Maybe a sanity check is needed?backintexas2013 said:
Funny the Teachers are against this. Wonder why?
10andBOUNCE said:
Curious the boards thoughts on homeschoolers participation in UIL. The senate just passed HB547 16-14 so it looks like this will happen after other failed attempts.
We homeschool our son and I personally don't have a major leaning either way, however my wife is pretty fired up. She didn't want this to pass as it may potentially blaze the path to invite more government into our homeschool choices.
https://legiscan.com/TX/text/HB547/id/2215800
Fore Left! said:
And for those where that's an issue, this is a solution that could help.
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Cassius said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
If public schools suck so bad, homeschooling extras should be better as well. Create your own teams and move on.
Are you bitter?
Not in the least. I'm for parents doing what they think is best but there are consequences to actions. If the same person isn't good enough to teach your child, why are they good enough to coach them?
Because they're completely different functions? One guy is "good enough" to make a pizza. The other is "good enough" to roll sushi. When sushi guy makes pizza I choose not to use him. This is an absurd argument on your part.
Not really. What evidence have you used that they aren't good enough to teach your child or what evidence have you used to determine they are good enough to coach your child? The answer is probably none at all except your preconceived bias.
Please explain how it's no different. Because I see the fundamental difference that the kid is enrolled in a public school and we can at least there is some sort of verification of "no pass, no play".BMX Bandit said:
It's not like being home school.
But it's no different then being homeschooled with regard to playing athletics at a different school.
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:If they teach those things, they clearly aren't smart enough to coach your child well.MediAg13 said:
Coaching a sport and teaching CRT or some *******ized version of American history are not the same thing.
So it's not my business to know what you are thinking while discussing a subject on a discussion board? Why are you here then?wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Cassius said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
If public schools suck so bad, homeschooling extras should be better as well. Create your own teams and move on.
Are you bitter?
Not in the least. I'm for parents doing what they think is best but there are consequences to actions. If the same person isn't good enough to teach your child, why are they good enough to coach them?
Because they're completely different functions? One guy is "good enough" to make a pizza. The other is "good enough" to roll sushi. When sushi guy makes pizza I choose not to use him. This is an absurd argument on your part.
Not really. What evidence have you used that they aren't good enough to teach your child or what evidence have you used to determine they are good enough to coach your child? The answer is probably none at all except your preconceived bias.
How I adjudicate that question isn't any of your business. The point is one can be "good enough" to do one thing and "not good enough" to do the other.
Fore Left! said:
No pass no play again
AndesAg92 said:Fore Left! said:
No pass no play again
So home school squares are all smart enough that this wouldn't be an issue?
So how have you determined that they aren't good enough to teach your child but they are good enough to coach your child?wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:If they teach those things, they clearly aren't smart enough to coach your child well.MediAg13 said:
Coaching a sport and teaching CRT or some *******ized version of American history are not the same thing.
Dude you are reaching so hard.
"Your garbage man's really bad when he tries to do your taxes, so they clearly aren't smart enough to pick up your garbage."
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Please explain how it's no different. Because I see the fundamental difference that the kid is enrolled in a public school and we can at least there is some sort of verification of "no pass, no play".BMX Bandit said:
It's not like being home school.
But it's no different then being homeschooled with regard to playing athletics at a different school.
Believe it or not, it is a thing. Sorry that it's inconvenient to your argument.Fore Left! said:
No pass no play again
Why are you arguing with me about what Tanya said? Talk to her.wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Please explain how it's no different. Because I see the fundamental difference that the kid is enrolled in a public school and we can at least there is some sort of verification of "no pass, no play".BMX Bandit said:
It's not like being home school.
But it's no different then being homeschooled with regard to playing athletics at a different school.
Clearly you haven't been following Tanya's arguments which are literally "if they're not in 'my' class they can't be on 'my' team." HSP kids are not in her class. Neither you nor her have addressed the blatant contradiction here.
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:So it's not my business to know what you are thinking while discussing a subject on a discussion board? Why are you here then?wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Cassius said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
If public schools suck so bad, homeschooling extras should be better as well. Create your own teams and move on.
Are you bitter?
Not in the least. I'm for parents doing what they think is best but there are consequences to actions. If the same person isn't good enough to teach your child, why are they good enough to coach them?
Because they're completely different functions? One guy is "good enough" to make a pizza. The other is "good enough" to roll sushi. When sushi guy makes pizza I choose not to use him. This is an absurd argument on your part.
Not really. What evidence have you used that they aren't good enough to teach your child or what evidence have you used to determine they are good enough to coach your child? The answer is probably none at all except your preconceived bias.
How I adjudicate that question isn't any of your business. The point is one can be "good enough" to do one thing and "not good enough" to do the other.
Answer my question first, please.wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:So it's not my business to know what you are thinking while discussing a subject on a discussion board? Why are you here then?wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Cassius said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
If public schools suck so bad, homeschooling extras should be better as well. Create your own teams and move on.
Are you bitter?
Not in the least. I'm for parents doing what they think is best but there are consequences to actions. If the same person isn't good enough to teach your child, why are they good enough to coach them?
Because they're completely different functions? One guy is "good enough" to make a pizza. The other is "good enough" to roll sushi. When sushi guy makes pizza I choose not to use him. This is an absurd argument on your part.
Not really. What evidence have you used that they aren't good enough to teach your child or what evidence have you used to determine they are good enough to coach your child? The answer is probably none at all except your preconceived bias.
How I adjudicate that question isn't any of your business. The point is one can be "good enough" to do one thing and "not good enough" to do the other.
You seem to really have a logic issue here and you're trying to deflect.
Let's just boil this down. Do you admit that someone can be qualified to do one thing but not another?
Reading is hard.Artorias said:
So after 8 pages, the only real argument from people opposing this is "I don't like it".
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Why are you arguing with me about what Tanya said? Talk to her.wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Please explain how it's no different. Because I see the fundamental difference that the kid is enrolled in a public school and we can at least there is some sort of verification of "no pass, no play".BMX Bandit said:
It's not like being home school.
But it's no different then being homeschooled with regard to playing athletics at a different school.
Clearly you haven't been following Tanya's arguments which are literally "if they're not in 'my' class they can't be on 'my' team." HSP kids are not in her class. Neither you nor her have addressed the blatant contradiction here.
Teach in small town Texas and get back to mewargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Please explain how it's no different. Because I see the fundamental difference that the kid is enrolled in a public school and we can at least there is some sort of verification of "no pass, no play".BMX Bandit said:
It's not like being home school.
But it's no different then being homeschooled with regard to playing athletics at a different school.
Clearly you haven't been following Tanya's arguments which are literally "if they're not in 'my' class they can't be on 'my' team." HSP kids are not in her class. Neither you nor her have addressed the blatant contradiction here.
No, apparently making a convincing argument is hard for you.Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Reading is hard.Artorias said:
So after 8 pages, the only real argument from people opposing this is "I don't like it".
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Answer my question first, please.wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:So it's not my business to know what you are thinking while discussing a subject on a discussion board? Why are you here then?wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Cassius said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
If public schools suck so bad, homeschooling extras should be better as well. Create your own teams and move on.
Are you bitter?
Not in the least. I'm for parents doing what they think is best but there are consequences to actions. If the same person isn't good enough to teach your child, why are they good enough to coach them?
Because they're completely different functions? One guy is "good enough" to make a pizza. The other is "good enough" to roll sushi. When sushi guy makes pizza I choose not to use him. This is an absurd argument on your part.
Not really. What evidence have you used that they aren't good enough to teach your child or what evidence have you used to determine they are good enough to coach your child? The answer is probably none at all except your preconceived bias.
How I adjudicate that question isn't any of your business. The point is one can be "good enough" to do one thing and "not good enough" to do the other.
You seem to really have a logic issue here and you're trying to deflect.
Let's just boil this down. Do you admit that someone can be qualified to do one thing but not another?
That might be true but my argument has clearly been more than "I don't like it.".Artorias said:No, apparently making a convincing argument is hard for you.Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Reading is hard.Artorias said:
So after 8 pages, the only real argument from people opposing this is "I don't like it".
Tanya 93 said:Teach in small town Texas and get back to mewargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Please explain how it's no different. Because I see the fundamental difference that the kid is enrolled in a public school and we can at least there is some sort of verification of "no pass, no play".BMX Bandit said:
It's not like being home school.
But it's no different then being homeschooled with regard to playing athletics at a different school.
Clearly you haven't been following Tanya's arguments which are literally "if they're not in 'my' class they can't be on 'my' team." HSP kids are not in her class. Neither you nor her have addressed the blatant contradiction here.
Let's just see if that's true. How did you determine that the teacher is incapable of teaching your kid but can clearly coach your child? What metric did you use?wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Answer my question first, please.wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:So it's not my business to know what you are thinking while discussing a subject on a discussion board? Why are you here then?wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:wargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Cassius said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
If public schools suck so bad, homeschooling extras should be better as well. Create your own teams and move on.
Are you bitter?
Not in the least. I'm for parents doing what they think is best but there are consequences to actions. If the same person isn't good enough to teach your child, why are they good enough to coach them?
Because they're completely different functions? One guy is "good enough" to make a pizza. The other is "good enough" to roll sushi. When sushi guy makes pizza I choose not to use him. This is an absurd argument on your part.
Not really. What evidence have you used that they aren't good enough to teach your child or what evidence have you used to determine they are good enough to coach your child? The answer is probably none at all except your preconceived bias.
How I adjudicate that question isn't any of your business. The point is one can be "good enough" to do one thing and "not good enough" to do the other.
You seem to really have a logic issue here and you're trying to deflect.
Let's just boil this down. Do you admit that someone can be qualified to do one thing but not another?
If you can't answer mine then there's no point in me answering yours.
This is a simple yes or no while you're asking for what could be explained in a multi page paper.
Do you admit that someone can be qualified to do one thing but not another? Yes or no?
I guess you don't read.wargograw said:Tanya 93 said:Teach in small town Texas and get back to mewargograw said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:Please explain how it's no different. Because I see the fundamental difference that the kid is enrolled in a public school and we can at least there is some sort of verification of "no pass, no play".BMX Bandit said:
It's not like being home school.
But it's no different then being homeschooled with regard to playing athletics at a different school.
Clearly you haven't been following Tanya's arguments which are literally "if they're not in 'my' class they can't be on 'my' team." HSP kids are not in her class. Neither you nor her have addressed the blatant contradiction here.
Should the HSP kids be allowed to play for their local [normal] public school or not?
