Cassius said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

But if a parent signs off they are passing is that ok?

---

If you want a less educated public, this is how you get it.

---

We already have a less educated public. A HS diploma is a damn joke.

And surely you don't believe no pass no play isn't a complete fraud? Social advancement is the norm.

---

I won't argue your points (I don't fully agree with your opinion on no pass/no play) but if you think this won't be abused by many parents, you are fooling yourself.

cevans_40 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

Why?

---

Many kids who go to school only because of sports and other activities will become "home-schooled."

---

So kids who only attend school for sports will somehow be less educated because they homeschool. That's completely illogical. If the only reason they go to school is for sports, your own words, they ain't learning through osmosis by sitting in a classroom.

Cassius said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

Why?

---

Many kids who go to school only because of sports and other activities will become "home-schooled."

---

So kids who only attend school for sports will somehow be less educated because they homeschool. That's completely illogical. If the only reason they go to school is for sports, your own words, they ain't learning through osmosis by sitting in a classroom.

---

Actually they are learning a little. At home, that will likely not be the case. At some point you have to consider we aren't talking about parents like you or myself.

wargograw said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

wargograw said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

wargograw said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

wargograw said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

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.

---

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?

---

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?

---

Answer my question first, please.

---

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?

---

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?

---

I've explained on two separate occasions now why I'm not answering that. What's your explanation other than "you first"?

---

All you have to do is answer the question I asked. If you aren't going to answer it, there is no reason to continue the conversation.

---

So you don't have any explanation for why you shouldn't answer other than "you first"? Pretty weak.

To answer your question in the shortest possible way: I live and breathe. I observe. Homeschool kids by and large come out with the values of their parents. Public school kids reject them at alarming rates (if their parents are conservative).

Coaching football requires very little imparting of values other than things we pretty much all agree on (hard work, punctuality, competition, etc.)

Bout what you expected, I'm sure, even though again none of that is really any of your business. Now, answer my question.

---

I'm waiting buddy. Answer my question.

Fore Left! said:

---

My kids attend very good public schools. I'd venture to say the education they are getting is superior to what many homeschool kids get. But that doesn't cause to me to have an issue with someone that homeschools in our district because I understand there are many reasons people do it. That also doesn't stop me from being totally fine with their kids participating in extracurriculars. I think it's healthy for both sets of kids to get together in a common interest, and I do not see how that would harm our community

---

Again much of the pushback has come from homeschool advocates concerned the TEA, UIL and ISDs will interfere with the schooling and curriculums of homeschool students. Also its unclear how or which school the homeschool student will attend for extracurriculars. (Could there be a scenario where a homeschool student goes to two different HS because of certain UIL offerings, e.g. soccer for one and theater at a another?)

Ultimately I dont think its a big deal and anything that leads us to more school choice the better, but I see where both the TEA/UIL and homeschool parents could abuse this ruling.

Cassius said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

But if a parent signs off they are passing is that ok?

---

If you want a less educated public, this is how you get it.

---

We already have a less educated public. A HS diploma is a damn joke.

And surely you don't believe no pass no play isn't a complete fraud? Social advancement is the norm.

---

Vince Young is a perfect example of what a joke high school is.

It's a lot of hand wringing over nothing. There would be a few small things to iron out but I think it could work just fine. There does need do be some accountability for homeschooling kids. Whether that's an equivalent quiz every six weeks or verification of some sort. Homeschool kids would need to be held to a similar standard/rules as public school kids because extracurriculars are not guaranteed but a privilege.

I really wouldn't give a **** if one of my athletes was homeschooled as long as they met the same eligibility requirements as everyone else.

cevans_40 said:

---

Cassius said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

But if a parent signs off they are passing is that ok?

---

If you want a less educated public, this is how you get it.

---

We already have a less educated public. A HS diploma is a damn joke.

And surely you don't believe no pass no play isn't a complete fraud? Social advancement is the norm.

---

I won't argue your points (I don't fully agree with your opinion on no pass/no play) but if you think this won't be abused by many parents, you are fooling yourself.

---

Works fine in other states that do it

Most states don't have no pass no play either. Is Texas cranking out more educated, successful athlete graduates because of it? No. We are pushing these kids through one way or another, many teachers pass them because they are afraid to lose the kid to dropping out if they lose their sport, and worse case it's a 3 week slap on the wrist

Great change. Take politics out of school education and we could all go to school liberal idiots have ruined the school
Systems. Because the educational system is trash doesn't mean we should make the athletic system follow. All kids that live in a district should be able to play ball. Not all should have to set in a room and listen to WOKE crap all day. Play ball!!! My kids are mine to raise not the schools systems. If more parents felt that way we could shut down half the programs that start governMent dependence for democrat votes. Government needs to stay out of my family. They work for me not me for them.

Quote:

---

If public school parents don't want home schooled kids getting access to any extracurricular activities, then I'm sure they agree that the district needs to stop taxing those families.

---

Then those public school parents better damn well be for vouchers because those homeschool kids and private school kids are funding the public school students. Can't have it both ways.

Artorias said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

Cassius said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

But if a parent signs off they are passing is that ok?

---

If you want a less educated public, this is how you get it.

---

We already have a less educated public. A HS diploma is a damn joke.

And surely you don't believe no pass no play isn't a complete fraud? Social advancement is the norm.

---

I won't argue your points (I don't fully agree with your opinion on no pass/no play) but if you think this won't be abused by many parents, you are fooling yourself.

---

Works fine in other states that do it

---

It sure does.

If I'm forced to pay for it, I should be able to use the system however I damn well please.

After finally reading this entire thread, the bottom line is that home school parents pay property taxes and should be able to expect their kids to participate in sporting and UIL events just like any other taxpayer's kid. Anyone who disagrees with this should certainly then be a proponent for vouchers unless they are being complete hypocrites.

Protestations from teachers are laughable. They work for the public and the students - all of them - not the other way around. Make the teaching/coaching schedule and if a home schooled kid want to participate they will have to adjust theirs to meet it.

Thankfully the legislature passed the bill and now the public schools have to make it work whether they like it or not. I would say let the whining commence but it looks like it already has.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

So you think teachers are more honest than parents

---

I think there is more accountability.

---

It's not like districts tell the teachers to let the students have 20 remediation attempts. Very accountable.

Why does every public school parent care so much? Because they are afraid Junior isn't going to be the starting pitcher or QB

These same parents openly ***** about "all the Asian kids" ruining their kids' class ranking.

You know who you are.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

wargograw said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

wargograw said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

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.

---

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?

---

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?

---

Answer my question first, please.

---

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?

---

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?

---

I know some fantastic coaches who aren't good classroom teachers. Just because someone is a great coach that doesn't mean they can teach an academic subject.

One issue with this bill (and there are several), is UIL extracurriculars will not likely become anymore accessible than they currently are (the whole purpose of this bill) because districts have no incentive to allow homeschoolers to participate. Without enrollment, the school won't receive funding. If they won't receive funding, other than the rare Tim Tebow being in your district, why would they agree to allow a homeschooler to participate? It'll likely be a completely worthless bill in that regard.

Additionally, if you happen to be of the small government mindset and belief that businesses should be able to make their own decisions, it should concern you, even if just a little bit, that this law is essentially forcing the hand of a "private" entity.

Now there are a ton of nuances that go into the relationship between UIL and TEA and it's not a total apples to apples comparison to John Doe who owns the local hardware store, but it's something to think about.

It is not private at all (not even a little bit). And, while I understand the state funding you mention, resident of the district do send the school money. An alternative, as has been mentioned, is school choice where the taxpayers' money can go to the school of choice. I assure you, this bill is far more desirable to local public schools than school choice. Sure, districts will develop local policies regarding the non-enrolled UIL participation but, if I understand the bill correctly, will not be allowed to deny the otherwise eligible participant. Those policies will have to be consistent for and fairly applied to all participants I'm sure. I see this as the best way for public schools to put a lid on the school choice push if they handle it correctly.
I beige you are correct though and that most Superintendant/board teams will resist and the only reason, as you mention is money.

Edit to add:
Being of a small government mindset, I also believe their should be no taxation without representation. This seems like a decent I compromise.

We homeschool our kids and are stoked about this bill. Could there be unintended consequences? Yeah. But the juice is worth the squeeze here.

Schools are charging the kids that participate a pretty sizable $$$ for many of these activities.

Ag87H2O said:

---

After finally reading this entire thread, the bottom line is that home school parents pay property taxes and should be able to expect their kids to participate in sporting and UIL events just like any other taxpayer's kid. Anyone who disagrees with this should certainly then be a proponent for vouchers unless they are being complete hypocrites.

Protestations from teachers are laughable. They work for the public and the students - all of them - not the other way around. Make the teaching/coaching schedule and if a home schooled kid want to participate they will have to adjust theirs to meet it.

Thankfully the legislature passed the bill and now the public schools have to make it work whether they like it or not. I would say let the whining commence but it looks like it already has.

---

Maybe this was asked above.


Should private school kids living in the district get to play sports on the public school teams? Their parents pay taxes too.

Districts do not have to allow homeschooler participation, which is why I say they have no incentive. Currently, homeschoolers can participate by enrolling and when they enroll the district receives money.

May I ask what about it excites you specifically?

If the bill allowed for private school children and didn't drive a distinction between private and homeschool, it would be much more widely accepted.

akm91 said:

---

Quote:

---

If public school parents don't want home schooled kids getting access to any extracurricular activities, then I'm sure they agree that the district needs to stop taxing those families.

---

Then those public school parents better damn well be for vouchers because those homeschool kids and private school kids are funding the public school students. Can't have it both ways.

---

Exactly. One alternative, in lieu of vouchers, is to just give a credit against ISD property taxes while your kids are either being home schooled or are in private school. Its a max of 12 years (unless you have multiple kids with staggered ages), then you go back to paying those ISD taxes like normal.

akm91 said:

---

Quote:

---

If public school parents don't want home schooled kids getting access to any extracurricular activities, then I'm sure they agree that the district needs to stop taxing those families.

---

Then those public school parents better damn well be for vouchers because those homeschool kids and private school kids are funding the public school students. Can't have it both ways.

---

You choose to homeschool your kid. You knew the sports situation when you made that choice. YOU can't have it both ways.

This post reads like "I sacrificed my kids education so they could play sports, you should have to too!"

Buck Turgidson said:

---

akm91 said:

---

Quote:

---

If public school parents don't want home schooled kids getting access to any extracurricular activities, then I'm sure they agree that the district needs to stop taxing those families.

---

Then those public school parents better damn well be for vouchers because those homeschool kids and private school kids are funding the public school students. Can't have it both ways.

---

Exactly. One alternative, in lieu of vouchers, is to just give a credit against ISD property taxes while your kids are either being home schooled or are in private school. Its a max of 12 years (unless you have multiple kids with staggered ages), then you go back to paying those ISD taxes like normal.

---

Homeschoolers with 7 kids might be able to milk this until they are old enough to get a homestead exemption.

AndesAg92 said:

---

akm91 said:

---

Quote:

---

If public school parents don't want home schooled kids getting access to any extracurricular activities, then I'm sure they agree that the district needs to stop taxing those families.

---

Then those public school parents better damn well be for vouchers because those homeschool kids and private school kids are funding the public school students. Can't have it both ways.

---

You choose to homeschool your kid. You knew the sports situation when you made that choice. YOU can't have it both ways.

---

Actually, he can now

This thread is a microcosm into why so many people don't want to trust their children to public schools.

If high school band and football is your holy grail golden goose to the point you are concerned about this bill and what that might mean for the pass/play or other nonsense false objections brought up, rather than being critical over why so many people are opting to home school, then you are part of the problem. Unfortunately, it looks like many here complaining about this are actual public school teachers.

It will be so few kids anyway. The stand some are taking against it feels a bit like punishment vs having the best interest of the overall community

I find it funny that so many of you imagine there are all these crappy parents who all the sudden are going to "homeschool" their kids because it's somehow easier having them at home than letting the government babysit them and give them free food for the day. Y'all clearly thought your bizarre objections through.

Keep public schooling your kids, homeschool haters! Thanks for doing your part to turn us into a communist nation.

Buck Turgidson said:

---

akm91 said:

---

Quote:

---

If public school parents don't want home schooled kids getting access to any extracurricular activities, then I'm sure they agree that the district needs to stop taxing those families.

---

Then those public school parents better damn well be for vouchers because those homeschool kids and private school kids are funding the public school students. Can't have it both ways.

---

Exactly. One alternative, in lieu of vouchers, is to just give a credit against ISD property taxes while your kids are either being home schooled or are in private school. Its a max of 12 years (unless you have multiple kids with staggered ages), then you go back to paying those ISD taxes like normal.

---

Umm ok I don't have kids does that mean I get a credit too?

I think alot the people against this are against it because homeschool parents have such a holier than thou attitude and think their little genius is too good for public school but still want to take advantage of the parts they like.

Would this also mean the homeschoolers get to compete in UIL academics?