In a thread discussing private and public schools it’s pretty reasonable to put that qualifier in. Nitpicking it just makes you look stupid.
It’s not a nitpick, however it may appear to the feebleminded.
The question is whether the school board’s responsibilities are to the public schools only or to education in the district generally.
Putting in the word “public” was a cheapo way to imply the former without actually having to make the case for it.
I keep calling them that because the board of a public school is called a public school board.
So you think the elected school board is in charge of the private schools? Not anywhere I’ve heard of.
Kind of begs the question, as to whether all they are is “the board of a public school”. You’d like to present them in this guise, but don’t seem to have much to offer beyond word games.
They’re not “in charge” of private schools. They’re tasked with furthering the education of kids in their district. This includes but is not limited to providing and running public schools, and they are “in charge” of those schools. They also have a role, albeit a more limited one, for private school kids, generally things like textbooks, bussing, special ed, whatever.
The notion being promulgated here is that these are somehow leeching off the public school kids, as if the natural course of events is that anyone who does not actually attend a public school should be entitled to no support for their education at all, a notion that does not seem to have a logical basis but is being reinforced by calling it the “public school board”. But the notion needs more support than just playing with words.
How about a law that stipulates that a majority of the school board has to have children in the public school system? Good? Bad? Workable?
I have no everloving idea of what you are talking about. They are the public school board. They are not the private school board. The private schools have their own board who have the rights, responsibilities and power over ensuring that the private school kids get an education. The public school board has the rights, responsibilities and power over ensuring that the public school kids get an education. The public school board has absolutely no power over policy in the private schools. They are two separate entities. You talked of taxation without representation, well the private schools are taking public taxpayer money and the taxpayers have no say over the private school board. Doesn’t that qualify?
The idea that the fraudulent sale of a public school to a private school based on a appraisal obtained by bribery by the private schools is a good thing because somehow, on average, it helps the kids in the district by helping the private school kids greatly, but only screwing the public school kids less than greatly is just silly.
I, likewise, have no idea of what you’re talking about. Thing is, I’m not sure if you do either.
What is this mysterious “private school board” that you’re talking about? To my knowledge no such thing exists. There is only one school board, and it’s been given powers to tax all the people and has responsibility towards all the kids.
If you have any actual facts that point otherwise, please whip them out.
Are you unaware that that a public school board is not in charge of a private school in their district? That they have their own governing body?
Such a law would be bad, unworkable, and stupid. It’s in everyone’s interest, not just those who happen to have young children, to have an educated populace.
Have you read post #145? Now might be a good time …
Pretty sure post 145 is flat out wrong. School boards do not choose or provide textbooks or busing for private scools.
And even if they did, I don’t think they’re supposed to provide 2 million dollar discounts to buying school buildings, which is what we’re talking about here.
My suggestion would be to research this a bit instead of just being “pretty sure” of it.
This link is a series of articles about the school district situation under discussion, and it repeatedly contradicts you, including:
And a number of similar statements.
This is very strange to me, of course for the private schools in any legal form there is a board, as we would have it, a conseil d’administration, is it even possible in the US to have a school which is not in any way a legal person with a governing body - a board?
No. No it isn’t.
Also, when I was putting down a floor in my attic I used a board. Words can have multiple meanings.
What we’re discussing here is whether the publically elected school board, with legal and taxing powers over the public, is responsible for the education of public school kids only, with a separate “private school board” responsible for that of private school kids, or whether the same board also has responsibilities (albeit more limited) for the education of kids who are not in public schools. The answer is that the second is correct.
No. No it isn’t.
Indeed. However in this instance there is the sole meaning of the Adminstration Board. It is the only meaning. To mean the elected body it is clear is it not just a school board.
As I see the other has said it that there are the private school boards which exist in the same instance as this public school board. You were attempting to play language games it seems to me. Taking account of the fact that the private schools are some legal persons with the governning bodies that under the administrative law in all languages are called the equivalent of the Board, to pretend it is somehow an error or a play for the others arguing against you to say the public school board is itself dishonest and stupid.
Your language is muddled and it’s hard to be certain of what you’re saying.
But best as I can figure, what you’re saying is that because “the other” has said there are private school boards which are comparable to the “public school board”, that it’s dishonest and stupid for someone else to maintain otherwise. Needless to say, I disagree with this.
In sum, any particular private school, or non-profit entity, or corporation could have its own board. But what we’re discussing is the elected government body known as the “school board”. There is no comparable entity for the private schools, and the board which administers the public schools is the only such body in any district. Therefore this body has responsibilities to children who are not enrolled in public schools.
To pretend otherwise based on the bogus claim that the private school kids have their own “private school board” is dishonest and/or stupid. (At least in NY State - I can’t guarantee all 50 states.) Probably more dishonest than stupid at this point (unless it’s really really stupid) considering that I’ve already quoted from a newspaper article to this effect.