All Activity

We miss this game on our schedule. Terribly miss it. This is historically one of our best rivalries (SR would be the next) as we were 11-10 against them....so at least we can always say that we got a game on them. Not to mention that not one Jasper coach has a winning record against HH. Love that one!

both Zachary and Kiser were option style power runners….nothing new to evaluate and base opinions for qb play on throwing the ball. Zachary (senior year was 2008 btw)believe was 2-0 against LCC both in playoffs and Kiser’s teams played LCC four straight years in playoffs. Kiser scored 16 rushing td’s in those four games. Couple of those games were real classics.

So you can't empathize well.

After Mitch started meddling, Dr. Bennett (selling school grades for money) and Pence/Holcomb dismantled the IDOE, we find that we are now stuck with some teachers who haven't had any education classes, kids who can't read, and voucher limits that start at over $100,000 so they can send their kids to private schools. The politicians create the problem and blame everyone else. A Message from Dr. Katie Jenner I know I have shared this in the past, and it still holds true…there are absolutely things that keep me up at night...whether it’s something that already happened, today’s running to-do list, or worrying about the future. One example is how to overcome the challenge of the number of Indiana students who cannot read. It really worries me…because not only does it impact our students today, but we know that by not having foundational reading skills, it will create significant lifelong obstacles. We all know the alarming truth that if a student is not reading by third grade, they are less likely to graduate high school. And, while the negative impacts of illiteracy are alarming…the juxtaposition of what is possible when a student can read is a game changer. In recent weeks, I have really appreciated listening and hearing from educators throughout our state. Whether it has been through a phone/Teams call, email, a more formal meeting, or catching up with a teacher at the soccer field or even in the parking lot after a school event (yes, this totally did happen with a good teacher friend!)....thank you for taking the time to share your feedback. Many educators shared that they are all in and are planning to or are already engaged in training that will better ensure all children can read. Some were inspired by the well-known reading podcast, Sold a Story, or the documentary, The Right to Read. Some signed up for the science of reading modules in the Indiana Learning Lab, the Indiana Literacy Cadre, and/or the Indiana Reading League (I signed up!). Some have completed LETRS or Orton-Gillingham training, and I could go on and on with examples. Thousands of Indiana teachers have already completed or are actively working on science of reading training. I try to say it often, but I know it’s never enough…thank you for all of your hard work and for caring so much about our students. I’m grateful for the collective effort to balance the urgent need to overcome Indiana’s literacy crisis with our shared desire to increase flexibility for educators. Below I have summarized the major themes we have heard. This is a lot of information, but this work really matters for students, so I wanted you to hear the why directly from me. As we listened, the majority of what we heard focused on four themes: 1) Synchronous vs. asynchronous training options; 2) Flexibility for teachers who have a PK-6 “parent license” but do not currently teach PK-5 literacy; 3) Concerns about the PRAXIS and what happens if a teacher does not pass; and 4) Requests for additional, no cost training options. There are a number of other questions that are addressed in the linked FAQ (and we will add to this document as additional questions arise); however, today I want to specifically talk through the four outlined above. Synchronous vs. asynchronous training options As we all work to juggle both our professional and personal obligations, many educators have expressed a desire to be able to complete science of reading training asynchronously, when it works for their schedule. I couldn’t agree more. On July 1, a new law will go into effect which will allow the full 80 hours of required professional development to be completed asynchronously. In addition to the approved trainings, we are also actively working with Keys to Literacy to quickly build an asynchronous option that will be available this fall (after the effective date of the new law). We will be able to accommodate any teacher wishing to participate in the asynchronous option, including anyone who may have already registered but wishes to participate in this new option instead. More information on asynchronous training options can be found in the FAQ, and our team can answer any unique questions. Just email us at INLitCenter@doe.in.gov. Our team is also working directly with educators and training providers to continuously update the list of approved training options (originally published in April) that some teachers have already completed through their school or independently over the past few months/years. This includes LETRS, Orton-Gillingham, the Indiana Literacy Cadre, as well as asynchronous training opportunities, to name a few. **Additional professional development opportunities are being reviewed as quickly as possible and on a rolling basis. Flexibility for teachers who have a PK-6 “parent license” but do not currently teach PK-5 literacy We’ve had quite a few questions from current teachers who have a PK-6 “parent license” but do not teach PK-5 literacy. Several have expressed a desire to invest the time they would spend on this science of reading-focused professional development toward training that more directly aligns to their current content area. Based on these conversations, we are adding increased flexibility to consider the variety of situations. An educator who holds a PK-6 parent license but teaches in a content area that does NOT involve literacy instruction for PK-5 students will NOT be required to earn the early literacy endorsement. In the future, if the educator does teach PK-5 literacy, they would be required to earn the early literacy endorsement in order to renew their license. All Indiana educators are still welcome and strongly encouraged to participate in science of reading training (including, the free training through Keys to Literacy or the many other options available). Concerns about the PRAXIS and what happens if a teacher does not pass Of the four themes outlined here, concerns about the Praxis exam have been the most common…and also the most tricky to solve. We continue to work extensively to expand the number of training options that teachers can apply toward the 80-hour requirement, and as that list grows, the need for a consistent, quality measure becomes even more important. To take a step back, currently, Praxis content examinations are used as the measure of proficiency for making content additions to Indiana's professional educator licenses. For the early literacy endorsement in particular, the Teaching Reading: Elementary (5205) Praxis exam was chosen based on its strong alignment to the science of reading (per the National Council on Teacher Quality). Indiana is now one of several states and territories where the exam is used and all use the same cut score (159 or higher, which is 67 correct responses out of 107 possible raw points).We have hosted several meetings with educators on this topic, and we also commit to convening an educator advisory team specifically focused on exploring other potential ways to provide a consistent, quality measure that ensures we are best implementing science of reading practices. Additional, no cost training options Last week, in response to the early demand, we announced additional training opportunities through Keys to Literacy for fall 2024 and spring 2025. Because PK-5 literacy teachers have three years or more to complete the requirements for the early literacy endorsement, some teachers have asked if there will be additional training opportunities beyond spring 2025. Because the state budget runs on a two-year budget cycle (for example, 2021-2023, 2023-2025, and 2025-2027, etc.), the current training is funded through the conclusion of the current state budget. We will absolutely continue to advocate for sustained funding for free teacher literacy training when the General Assembly convenes in January to build the 2025-2027 budget. As a reminder, the FAQ with additional information can be found here, and we will continue to add additional questions and answers as they arise. Please continue to share your solution-ideas as we work together to ensure more Indiana students learn to read. As always, thank you for all that you do for our students!

As odd as it sounds, I was more impressed with Zachery and Kiser, when I saw them both in person, for their defensive play as opposed to their offensive, QB style. In the LCC-Sheridan game that I saw, I think it was 2011, LCC shutout Sheridan. If I recall correctly though, that game was not decided until the 4th quarter and the offensive standout for Sheridan that I remembered for that game was a kid whose name I think was Callahan. He was a kid that everytime he touched the ball, you worried that he could break it ... not from speed, but just sheer bowling people over. In that Pioneer game, I think Kiser did more on defense to keep LCC from getting traction. On offense, I remember the Llewellyns being the offensive stars of that game. You could certainly make a case, in both the cases of Zachery and Kiser, in those two specific games, that they both kept the team held together, playing both sides of the ball. Unfortunately, I only got to see those two guys in a single game each. I think, it's certainly a case that, sometimes, a single game might not be an indication of great careers. On the other hand, I had a chance to see Mills all the way from 5th grade through high school graduation and kind of the same with Kidwell when he played youth ball at Benton Central and then later on when he ended up at West Lafayette.

Blue Mountain State!

Well I guess my 1970's era understanding of "right" and "wrong" that my Christian father and mother instilled in me hasn't evolved into anything much different over my lifetime. I'm OK with that.....So I guess I'm old fashioned in a sense. Maybe that's why it is refreshing to me to hear a mid-20's guy that shares some of my values articulate his beliefs so well. Gives me a little more hope for our future I suppose.

My point was simply that continually exposing oneself to a single point of view inevitably leads to confirmation bias, which absolutely prevents real critical thinking. If you really want to do your due diligence to give you the highest probability that you’re on the “right” side of an issue, you have to assess both sides — and not as filtered through your ideological colleagues.

I think we did about the same time...no worries.

No I don't. But as I said it is not just commercials.

Nice article from Kyle Sokeland about the SIAC expansion 5 years ago... https://www.courierpress.com/story/sports/high-school/2024/05/21/a-look-at-sw-indiana-athletics-five-years-after-conference-realignment/73726204007/

Sorry. I didn't see that you had posted Kyle's article from today...

See the third article.

They both voted no to TW joining the ICC. So highly doubtful. The only 2 schools that make sense from a size and location stand point are Edgewood and Owen Valley. Not really wanting that, there’s just not many options. Webo and Cascade would be good, but they just separated from Sagamore and ICC.

Boonville is the caliber of GS? Can anyone weigh in on why did Boonville not want to move to the SIAC?

They also picked up MD by moving to SIAC, so the "new" good gates would be MD, Castle and Reitz (but I honestly don't know how well Reitz fans travel to Jasper). No question Bosse, Harrison and Central would be much less gate than Wash, BV & Mt. V. Bosse did have some decent crowds last year being that they were competitive. Coincidently, Kyle Sokeland has an article on the 5th anniversary of the SIAC expansion in today's Courier. https://www.courierpress.com/story/sports/high-school/2024/05/21/a-look-at-sw-indiana-athletics-five-years-after-conference-realignment/73726204007/

The PAC already has a school bigger in Boonville. I have a feeling you don't know the story. https://www.courierpress.com/story/sports/high-school/2024/05/21/a-look-at-sw-indiana-athletics-five-years-after-conference-realignment/73726204007/ https://www.courierpress.com/story/sports/high-school/2019/06/22/how-southern-indiana-ads-made-decisions-joining-siac-pac/1531269001/ https://www.courierpress.com/story/sports/high-school/2019/06/06/boonville-high-school-ad-we-were-never-comfortable-joining-southern-indiana-athletic-conference/1366802001/

It could be possible.... when GS moves up to 4A in a couple years (enrollment).... Will the PAC want a school that big? Could GS find a buddy and move to the SIAC? HEADS WOULD ROLL!

I'm curious the net effect on Jasper as well. Memorial and VL were already on their schedule, but they gave up HH and SR games to pick up Reitz and Castle. Bosse, Harrison, and Central gates would probably be less than Wash, BV, and MTV.

How sexy would a GS Jasper game be....I remember Jack Jewell beating them in 83, 84 and 85.

I think HH and SR miss playing Jasper because of for a few reasons: 1. Competition... 2. Bragging Rights.... 3. Gate/Concession $$$$$$$$$$$$$

This is spot on....everyone having their non-conference games on different weeks made it tough. We would have what everyone wanted if Boonville had played along, including HH having the cake schedule they seem to enjoy having. Moch therapy session with HH AD: Now repeat after me....it's ok if we win state and are 14-1...it's ok if we win state and are 14-1. Now repeat after me....it's ok if our opponents average more than 7 points...it's ok if our opponents average more than 7 points.

We basically have it in sectional (s) now anyway, so it is what it is.

Looking back at Harrell's site, it appears HH played rotated through V. Lincoln, MD and Mt. Vernon as non-PAC opponents for a number of years. If the the darn SIAC would go to divisions, it could create a great opportunity for an annual PAC-SIAC "showdown" type of event. That would be a whole lot of fun.

So, given that Mr. Cohen's admitted (under oath) larceny is in play in this trial, he now feels he can run for Congress. https://nypost.com/2024/05/20/opinion/trump-trial-in-tatters-after-michael-cohens-otherworldly-testimony/ The completion of the testimony of Michael Cohen left the prosecution of Donald Trump, like its star witness, in tatters. In the final day of cross-examination, Cohen admitted to committing larceny in stealing tens of thousands of dollars from his client. Even more notably, he admitted to the larceny on the stand — after the statute of limitations had passed. There will be no dead felony zapped back into life against Cohen, as it was for Trump. Cohen clearly has found a home for his unique skill as a convicted, disbarred serial perjurer. It was not the first time that prosecutors looked the other way as Cohen admitted to major criminal conduct: In a prior hearing, Cohen admitted under oath that he lied in a previous case where he pleaded guilty to lying. If that is a bit confusing, it was just another day in the life of Michael Cohen, who appears only willing to tell to the truth if he has no other alternative. The result is truly otherworldly. You have a disbarred lawyer not only casually discussing lies and uncharged crimes, but prosecutors who proceeded to get him to remind the jury that he is not facing any further criminal charges. If any one of those jurors had stolen tens of thousands of dollars, they would be given a fast trip to the hoosegow. Yet Cohen then matter-of-factly said he plans to run for Congress due to his “name recognition” — the ultimate proof that it does not matter whether you are famous or infamous, so long as they spell your name right. As a legislator, Cohen would have the unique ability to say he will not be corrupted by Congress — because he came to Congress corrupted. While most members wait to take office to commit felonies, Rep. Cohen would show up with a self-affirming criminal record. He could then take one of the few oaths that he has not previously violated as the Honorable Rep. Michael Cohen. At the end of the day, Cohen is the ultimate shining object for prosecutors to use as a distraction from the glaring omissions in their case. Prior witnesses testified that Trump’s payments to Cohen were designated as “legal expenses” not by Trump but by his accounting staff. Moreover, Cohen admitted that he worked for Trump for years in his murky capacity as a fixer. References to payments as a retainer were approved by Allen Weisselberg, a retired executive with the Trump Organization. The “legal expense” label was a natural characterization for a lawyer who was paid monthly and was on call as Trump’s personal counsel. In any other district, this case would never have been allowed to go to trial. It certainly now should be facing a directed verdict by the court. Indeed, with any other defendant, a New York jury would be giving a Bronx cheer in derision. Even CNN hosts and experts have admitted that this case would never have been brought against another defendant or in another district. That is what Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is counting on. The biggest problem facing the defense is not the evidence, but the judge: Judge Juan Merchan seems to be channeling George Patton’s warning, “May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won’t.” Merchan has not given any indication that he is seriously considering a directed verdict, which he should clearly grant before this goes to the jury. Merchan’s rulings have largely favored the prosecution, including some rulings that left some of us mystified. Merchan continues to allow the jury to hear references to campaign finance violations that do not exist. After gutting any use of a legal expert to testify on the absence of any such violations, the judge allowed the jury to hear Cohen state that the payments to Stormy Daniels were clearly campaign violations. All that Merchan would offer is a weak instruction telling jurors not to take such statements as proof of a violation. The alleged campaign finance violations allowed Cohen to try to implicate Trump. However, it is doubtful that Trump could have been convicted on such a charge in any other venue. It is precisely what the Justice Department tried and failed to do with John Edwards, a Democratic candidate. After that unmitigated failure, the Justice Department dropped this theory of hush money as a campaign contribution. Indeed, after reviewing the Trump payments, not only did the Justice Department decline any charges but the Federal Election Commission did not even seek a civil fine. On Monday, Merchan’s orders became even more inexplicable when Cohen’s former attorney Robert Costello took the stand. Merchan immediately started to sustain a flurry of prosecutors’ objections as Costello basically accused Cohen of multiple acts of perjury. At one point, Costello — one of the most experienced lawyers in New York and a former prosecutor — exclaimed that one of the judge’s rulings was “ridiculous.” The judge chastised Costello and even challenged him: “Are you staring me down?” In fact, it was hard not to stare. What is happening in the courtroom of Judge Juan Merchan is anything but ordinary.