He won't be signing on the 20th because he has some academic stuff to clear up.
100% agree.As an educator, I can honestly say there are very few excuses for this. Any system that allows someone to stay eligible but not be on track is not doing the student any good. Then they are expected to perform in college. I know there can be circumstances but they are very rare. If I am off base I am sure you will let know.
As an educator, I can honestly say there are very few excuses for this. Any system that allows someone to stay eligible but not be on track is not doing the student any good. Then they are expected to perform in college. I know there can be circumstances but they are very rare. If I am off base I am sure you will let know.
Doesn't bode well for York.As an educator, I can honestly say there are very few excuses for this. Any system that allows someone to stay eligible but not be on track is not doing the student any good. Then they are expected to perform in college. I know there can be circumstances but they are very rare. If I am off base I am sure you will let know.
I agree as well, as a teacher and coach, students literally have to consciously make the choice to struggle in school. If they simply do what is asked of them they are going to be fine academically.100% agree.
He should have been missing games.
Unless he simply stopped caring after football, but thats too quick so i doubt it.
More "compassion" and easy standards in our schools.
That was a bigger crock of shit than common core.No child left behind.
No child left behind.
Agreed, I imagine if he wasn’t from York, NE we would have cut ties long ago.I am shocked this kid still has an offer from us, quite frankly. He seems to lack maturity. Not impressed with his play this Fall either
I am shocked this kid still has an offer from us, quite frankly. He seems to lack maturity. Not impressed with his play this Fall either
He is taking some on line classes which they are waiting on grades for. Sounds like he will not get the grades before Dec 20 so Nebraska is not allowing him to sign until the grades are in.As an educator, I can honestly say there are very few excuses for this. Any system that allows someone to stay eligible but not be on track is not doing the student any good. Then they are expected to perform in college. I know there can be circumstances but they are very rare. If I am off base I am sure you will let know.
One of the biggest problems with No Child Left Behind was that we got rid of teaching to the skills needed and further pushed to teach to the test then we already had as an educational Department. I taught pre no child and during no child and it certainly made a difference because people that I worked for and then when I did substitute teaching no the test know the test know the test was all I kept hearing. It should have been get the kids smarter get the kids smarter but that doesn't always show up on a test
No Child Left Behind is a thing of the past. I was principal at a school that knocked the top out if the test scores so our school had no problems with NCLB.
another governmental good intention with unintended consequences.No child left behind...classic.
GW had all the answers!
Yes.What are your thoughts on getting rid of the federal Dept of Education?
NCAA initial eligibility is a combination of GPA and test scores. So a kid could pass every class, be eligible to play in high school and still not be eligible to play NCAA athletics.
I don’t think you can blame a school district for this situation. If the kid is passing his classes he can play.
As far as Texas goes. The no pass no play is a decent rule but is a bit of a misnomer. A kid can be failing a class currently and still be allowed to play. There are grade checks every 3 weeks, but not all of those grade checks will make a kid eligible. The clock starts over at the end of the quarter.
Another football thread started with good intention with unintended consequences.another governmental good intention with unintended consequences.
What are your thoughts on getting rid of the federal Dept of Education?
Passed by a BIPARTISAN congress...facts suck sometimesNo child left behind...classic.
GW had all the answers!
The dept of Ed is a fairly recent organization government wise, it was started 79-80. It was all part of the Great society where the government was expanding and taking on more control of everything in our lives.
If it were me I would considering getting rid of it. The states determine what is taught and when now. The DOE mainly hands down regulations and tells schools what they can and cannot do such as what to do with bathrooms.
States should know what they need to do to compete and get students ready. If they don't get students ready, there will be a huge uproar by businesses and parents. JMHO
Keep as much as possible on the local and state levels, home rule.
Passed by a BIPARTISAN congress...facts suck sometimes