Jump to content
Head Coach Openings 2024 ×
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

Private vs. Parochial - Big Difference


Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, gonzoron said:

In other words, a small percentage of schools should be punished because of the apathy of public school students. Got it.

I don't think that is his point.....As an example, we have about 10% of our population that are physically and/or mentally incapable of participating in football. So the REAL difference is not necessarily who is in the building for non public schools, it's more about who is not. With that population being minimal or non existent in those schools, they are classified among schools with the same total number of students, but a smaller pool of them to draw from for a sport like football. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, coachkj said:

By making it as high as possible. More kids obviously equals more money. No school is going to turn money down to compete at a lower level in athletics. Ritter, Guerin, and Scecina have all been 1A in the not too distant past. Chatard was 2A for a long time, and Cathedral and Roncalli dominated 3A.  They have all grown and won’t control enrollment until their buildings won’t hold another kid.

So an avowed non-Christian with $ and a very fast 40-yard dash time can enroll at any of these p/p schools with no issues?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

So an avowed non-Christian with $ and a very fast 40-yard dash time can enroll at any of these p/p schools with no issues?

 

If their parents have the $10,000+ dollars, or they qualify for vouchers.   Just as "an avowed Non-Christian with $ (or vouchers) and a very strong vocal cords, drummer, or say avowed chess player.   Really just any "avowed non-Christian with $ or vouchers.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Grandpa B said:

If their parents have the $10,000+ dollars, or they qualify for vouchers.   Just as "an avowed Non-Christian with $ (or vouchers) and a very strong vocal cords, drummer, or say avowed chess player.   Really just any "avowed non-Christian with $ or vouchers.  

Interesting.  Would they take said student if they refused to attend Mass during school?  Or not take the religious classes required.  But they are a world class violinist or debater

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Irishman said:

I don't think that is his point.....As an example, we have about 10% of our population that are physically and/or mentally incapable of participating in football. So the REAL difference is not necessarily who is in the building for non public schools, it's more about who is not. With that population being minimal or non existent in those schools, they are classified among schools with the same total number of students, but a smaller pool of them to draw from for a sport like football. 

I've always been surprised that this hasn't been a consideration for calculating the classification numbers.  My guess is that it is likely the same reason that there isn't a reverse Success Factor in place.  I'm sure that the numbers exist because I suspect that schools are eligible for additional or special funding based on students who occupy specific categories, so those numbers are already known and utilized albeit in a different way.  There's potentially that argument that some districts also have facilities for some students who struggle in mainstream public schools.  Some kids with addiction issues or other non-traditional student issues attend a school in the district that is specially-geared to supporting these students while other districts don't necessarily have that option; however, that's not uniform across even public schools in an area much less across the state.  I'd have to think out the details a bit more, but you could also potentially have a situation where you have adjustments for grades as well ... a kid who's failing 5 of 6 classes isn't likely doing much of anything at that school.  The issue at play here would be to what extent do you take pressure off of the football classification, if any, due to the failure of kids in a classroom.  We certainly have a pass/play rule for athletes, but this would extend further than that because it would include non-athletes. 

On the original idea of folks out of consideration for the denominator ... I'm just spitballing here as a general example so don't attack.  A kid in high school with twins is probably not going to play on the football or volleyball team, so you remove that student from the denominator/count.  Now I know folks may say something like, "You don't know that person won't play and they might be able to balance twins, their schoolwork, and a post-season tourney run" and that's very true, but I expect that's not going to be a situation that tips the scales for any school and isn't going to be seen in enough numbers to be "exploited" by schools ... hopefully not that it would even cross their minds.  If it happens, then it happens. You don't preclude the person from playing, but they don't count against the numbers.  Just some thoughts off the top of the head. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From 2010-12, 4 private schools swept the 4 smallest classes & won three-peats-- LCC 1A, Luers 2A, Chatard 3A, Cath 4A. The Success Factor was instituted in 2013 & has had an impact. For those 4 schools, only Cathedral got past Regional in the higher class as they won 5A for the next 2 years. From 2013-2020, nobody else has pulled off a three-peat except WeBo (public school).

I also think that it was a smart move to keep bumped-up programs in the higher class if they earn 2 or more points. Cathedral won Regional in 2017, lost in Sectional to runner-ups Decatur Central in 2018 but stayed up in 5A due to that change. In 2019, they lost to state champs New Pal in Regional & then cruised to the state title this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, LaSalle Lions 1976 said:

Interesting.  Would they take said student if they refused to attend Mass during school?  Or not take the religious classes required.  But they are a world class violinist or debater

Heck, similar stuff like that happens all the time WITH "the faithful."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CYO system is a huge advantage. Not only do those kids play together for many years but they are able to learn the same offense/defense as the HS program while being taught excellent fundamentals. That said, broadcasters always talk about the great Center Grove youth program in the same way. Pioneer too, I think. Maybe towns/public schools have built great youth programs thru Pop Warner or USA Football which led to sustained success at the HS level-- but it takes a ton of work.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Irishman said:

I don't think that is his point.....As an example, we have about 10% of our population that are physically and/or mentally incapable of participating in football. So the REAL difference is not necessarily who is in the building for non public schools, it's more about who is not. With that population being minimal or non existent in those schools, they are classified among schools with the same total number of students, but a smaller pool of them to draw from for a sport like football. 

I think this could be great equalizer.  In the South Bend schools, about 15 to 18% of the student population has an IEP.  There are different levels of written IEP's from a consult to 100% self contained classroom.  There were/are some top athletes that have an IEP.

That being said, the ISHAA has rules in place for students who aren't on diploma track. 

So I don't know how you would how you would adjust the numbers to get the right number of ineligible students.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, foxbat said:

Heck, similar stuff like that happens all the time WITH "the faithful."

 

That's hilarious.  I have never seen that before.

My response was going to be "What happens at a school-wide pep session if someone doesn't lean to the left, lean to the right, stand up, and sit down?'  But that scene fits that description too! 😃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/29/2020 at 9:57 AM, Grover said:

Don't drop to the old hate/envy argument.  There's rational thought to the animosity.  Public schools have to accept pretty much everybody in their school district.  In today's world it is difficult to find an acceptable way to word it but let's just compare the percentage of students participating in extracurriculars at private vs. public schools.  Public schools have a much larger percentage of students who simply show up.  They contribute nothing to the school system EXCEPT increasing the enrollment and (in the sports world) bumping the school up to a bigger division.  Is that controlling enrollment?  No.  Is it a huge advantage for the privates?  Absolutely.  Does that mean I hate or envy the privates?  Not even a little.  My wife's family is a Ritter family.  I have many friends from Roncalli and Cathedral.  I've also been involved in highly competitive youth football for 20 years and crediting the success of the privates to the CYO league is avoiding the obvious.

I have preaching this for years here on GID.  The counter argument typically involves "affluent" public districts.  That argument is BS...even the most affluent public district is still disadvantaged in terms of a subset of the enrollment number being kids that do little more than take up space.  This is the only factor that even needs to be considered as to why enrollment alone doesn't work.  Don't talk about the CYO or the publics that have good feeder programs.....that's just a distraction.  All things being (thinks = all the stuff we say is needed for football success), two schools with basically the same enrollment, one public one private.  There are simply higher numbers of prospective football players at the private.  It is an advantage and the data proves it out.  The question is does SF address it?  It has helped, and with some tweaks (two year rolling cycle etc.) it can help even more.  But at the end of the day will it just make room for more privates to slip in that aren't quite as good as the top tier privates at (all the stuff we say is needed for football success)?  It still feels like there needs to be some sort of adjustment regarding how bad enrollment is at being the starting point for classification to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Muda69 said:

So an avowed non-Christian with $ and a very fast 40-yard dash time can enroll at any of these p/p schools with no issues?

 

I have first hand knowledge of two Christian schools.  At one a "statement of faith" must be signed.  At the other a student needed to sign a declaration to be open to and not divisive toward Christian doctrine.  Don't sign, don't get in.  Sign and lie and the student would be removed (with a process of course).  Several students that would have made us better at both schools were turned down for admission for numerous reasons, as well as athletes expelled or asked to leave for breaking rules.  You can believe me or not.

The schools have an obligation to the hundreds of families who pay good money to send their children to the p/p schools to keep the environment to the families expectations.  Again, believe it or not, winning state championships is pretty far down on the list of reasons why parents send their kids to private schools. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/29/2020 at 10:57 AM, Grover said:

Don't drop to the old hate/envy argument.  There's rational thought to the animosity.  Public schools have to accept pretty much everybody in their school district.  In today's world it is difficult to find an acceptable way to word it but let's just compare the percentage of students participating in extracurriculars at private vs. public schools.  Public schools have a much larger percentage of students who simply show up.  They contribute nothing to the school system EXCEPT increasing the enrollment and (in the sports world) bumping the school up to a bigger division.  Is that controlling enrollment?  No.  Is it a huge advantage for the privates?  Absolutely.  Does that mean I hate or envy the privates?  Not even a little.  My wife's family is a Ritter family.  I have many friends from Roncalli and Cathedral.  I've also been involved in highly competitive youth football for 20 years and crediting the success of the privates to the CYO league is avoiding the obvious.

Agree with Grover....

I have always been an advocate of a "clearninghouse" system.  That counted the number of kids that participate in ANY extracurricular (sports, music, etc).  That is your "participant" enrollment.  For PP's and affluent public schools this number will be near or over 90% of their total enrollment.  For schools with struggling "demographics" (however you want to determine that)....it may be 50% of total enrollment or lower.

The issue isn't the kids that publics/PPs count....the issue it the kids that PP's don't "have to count".  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, LaSalle Lions 1976 said:

I think this could be great equalizer.  In the South Bend schools, about 15 to 18% of the student population has an IEP.  There are different levels of written IEP's from a consult to 100% self contained classroom.  There were/are some top athletes that have an IEP.

That being said, the ISHAA has rules in place for students who aren't on diploma track. 

So I don't know how you would how you would adjust the numbers to get the right number of ineligible students.

Can you point to those rules you are referring to? As long as I have been here; 13 years now, the IHSAA enrollment has matched our DOE/ADM enrollment total. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, coachkj said:

I have first hand knowledge of two Christian schools.  At one a "statement of faith" must be signed.  At the other a student needed to sign a declaration to be open to and not divisive toward Christian doctrine.  Don't sign, don't get in.  Sign and lie and the student would be removed (with a process of course).  Several students that would have made us better at both schools were turned down for admission for numerous reasons, as well as athletes expelled or asked to leave for breaking rules.  You can believe me or not.

The schools have an obligation to the hundreds of families who pay good money to send their children to the p/p schools to keep the environment to the families expectations.  Again, believe it or not, winning state championships is pretty far down on the list of reasons why parents send their kids to private schools. 

So the answer to my question is "no".  Have to keep the environment of these schools as close to the concept of Christian Homogeneity as possible.  Got it. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, US31 said:

Agree with Grover....

I have always been an advocate of a "clearninghouse" system.  That counted the number of kids that participate in ANY extracurricular (sports, music, etc).  That is your "participant" enrollment.  For PP's and affluent public schools this number will be near or over 90% of their total enrollment.  For schools with struggling "demographics" (however you want to determine that)....it may be 50% of total enrollment or lower.

The issue isn't the kids that publics/PPs count....the issue it the kids that PP's don't "have to count".  

I like this idea more than doing category checks because it's not something that you have to categorize or label a kid based on socioeconomic status, number of kids, disability or accommodation although I could see someone saying that might still not directly hit the mark because of the difference between physical EC and non-physical EC.  For example, I went to school with a kid who was in a leg and back brace for the better part of five years.  He was involved in all of the academic teams like quiz bowl, chess club, and even drama and would even throw the football with us at recess, but couldn't play sports.  Nonetheless, I think it's a good starting point for discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, slice60 said:

The CYO system is a huge advantage. Not only do those kids play together for many years but they are able to learn the same offense/defense as the HS program while being taught excellent fundamentals. That said, broadcasters always talk about the great Center Grove youth program in the same way. Pioneer too, I think. Maybe towns/public schools have built great youth programs thru Pop Warner or USA Football which led to sustained success at the HS level-- but it takes a ton of work.

Actually I agree CYO is a huge advantage but not in the same way you have put it. I will use Roncalli as an example (I have no affiliation with them).

Lets say 6 of the feeder schools for Roncalli have Cadet football. Holy Name, Nativity, St. Barnabas, S.S. Francis and Clare, St. Jude, and Our Lady of Greenwood. Roncalli runs a Spread No-Huddle offense and a 4-2-5 defense. Holy Name could be running the Pro formation and a 3-4, Nativity an I-Formation and 4-4, St. Barnabas a spread and 3-3, St. Jude a spread and 4-2-5, SSFC runs a pistol and 4-4, and OLofG run a Wing T and a 4-4. Now I agree they are taught fundamentals and also see many different looks. Where it becomes a solid advantage is the number of players from each team that have learned their positions and move up to the HS and create depth and or battle for positions.

 

Now what Center Grove Bantam has done that Publics schools can emulate to a certain degree (CG Bantam is big). The big advantage is they can set a play book with the Wing T and 4-3 defense the kids learn it from 2nd through 6th grade. They also run the same formations at the middle schools. By the time a Carson Steele (just an example) hits High School he knows those basic plays and the scheme like muscle memory. Sure the expand upon the play book and learn more intricate plays, but the know the basics of the system. This is a model most Public schools should use and yes it does take a lot of work. The other key is keeping them out for the team as they filter from youth to middle school and then to HS. Of course Bantam isn't the only thing at CG Coach Moore has done. He has also done a lot with strength and speed training.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, FastpacedO said:

Actually I agree CYO is a huge advantage but not in the same way you have put it. I will use Roncalli as an example (I have no affiliation with them).

Lets say 6 of the feeder schools for Roncalli have Cadet football. Holy Name, Nativity, St. Barnabas, S.S. Francis and Clare, St. Jude, and Our Lady of Greenwood. Roncalli runs a Spread No-Huddle offense and a 4-2-5 defense. Holy Name could be running the Pro formation and a 3-4, Nativity an I-Formation and 4-4, St. Barnabas a spread and 3-3, St. Jude a spread and 4-2-5, SSFC runs a pistol and 4-4, and OLofG run a Wing T and a 4-4. Now I agree they are taught fundamentals and also see many different looks. Where it becomes a solid advantage is the number of players from each team that have learned their positions and move up to the HS and create depth and or battle for positions.

 

Now what Center Grove Bantam has done that Publics schools can emulate to a certain degree (CG Bantam is big). The big advantage is they can set a play book with the Wing T and 4-3 defense the kids learn it from 2nd through 6th grade. They also run the same formations at the middle schools. By the time a Carson Steele (just an example) hits High School he knows those basic plays and the scheme like muscle memory. Sure the expand upon the play book and learn more intricate plays, but the know the basics of the system. This is a model most Public schools should use and yes it does take a lot of work. The other key is keeping them out for the team as they filter from youth to middle school and then to HS. Of course Bantam isn't the only thing at CG Coach Moore has done. He has also done a lot with strength and speed training.

This is spot on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, US31 said:

Agree with Grover....

I have always been an advocate of a "clearninghouse" system.  That counted the number of kids that participate in ANY extracurricular (sports, music, etc).  That is your "participant" enrollment.  For PP's and affluent public schools this number will be near or over 90% of their total enrollment.  For schools with struggling "demographics" (however you want to determine that)....it may be 50% of total enrollment or lower.

The issue isn't the kids that publics/PPs count....the issue it the kids that PP's don't "have to count".  

That may work until the football crazy administration decides to dissolve the extracurricular chess club because the 10 or so members would bump the largest 3A football school to now the smallest 4A school.  

Edited by Muda69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Irishman said:

Can you point to those rules you are referring to? As long as I have been here; 13 years now, the IHSAA enrollment has matched our DOE/ADM enrollment total. 

If you look in the Unified Sports section, it has the rules for eligibility.  A non diploma students has to make progress on their IEP goals to be eligible.  A student on diploma track must follow eligibility rule like the regular ed students.

I think that is what you were asking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Muda69 said:

That may work until the football crazy administration decides to dissolve the extracurricular chess club because the 10 or so members would bump the largest 3A football school to now the smallest 4A school.  

What I'm suggesting is a "clearinghouse" form that every kid who WANTS to participate in ANY extracurricular would have to fill out at beginning of year.  Most schools have something like this already that serves as code of conduct/drug testing/etc form.  You aren't counting specific kids in each extracurricular, you are having them declare their intended interest.  Some of these kids may not even go out for sports, band, the play, student council, etc.  But they are a potential "participant" and would be counted as such for IHSAA classification.  I imagine DOE would find some purpose for this data as well.

Somewhere back in the depths of old PP debate archives there is a longer (and likely better) version of this proposal...but now I'm old with less brain cells🤪

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FastpacedO said:

Actually I agree CYO is a huge advantage but not in the same way you have put it. I will use Roncalli as an example (I have no affiliation with them).

Lets say 6 of the feeder schools for Roncalli have Cadet football. Holy Name, Nativity, St. Barnabas, S.S. Francis and Clare, St. Jude, and Our Lady of Greenwood. Roncalli runs a Spread No-Huddle offense and a 4-2-5 defense. Holy Name could be running the Pro formation and a 3-4, Nativity an I-Formation and 4-4, St. Barnabas a spread and 3-3, St. Jude a spread and 4-2-5, SSFC runs a pistol and 4-4, and OLofG run a Wing T and a 4-4. Now I agree they are taught fundamentals and also see many different looks. Where it becomes a solid advantage is the number of players from each team that have learned their positions and move up to the HS and create depth and or battle for positions.

Surprisingly have not heard anyone touch on this as part of the 'advantage' that some schools have.  It is no different than at public schools that have multiple middle schools that feed in to them.  You basically have starters competing for positions when they all come together.  This is why you'll see a school with 75 kids on the roster.

Good information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...