Private Schools 7 - Public Schools 1. That’s a wrap!

[wickerpark wildcat]

Just to put some numbers behind the swing... Private schools have always punched above their weight in football, but the last 5 years have been dramatically more dominant. I split the data into 5 year periods, and the split was always somewhere around 2/3 public & 1/3 private champs. In last 5 years, it is 50/50.

*Note that I am eyeballing which schools are private & public, possible made an error or 2.

Year (group)		Private	Public
1974-75 ->1978-79	% of Total	32%​	68%​
1974-75 ->1978-79	Count	8​	17​
1979-80 ->1983-84	% of Total	38%​	62%​
1979-80 ->1983-84	Count	11​	18​
1984-85 -> 1988-89	% of Total	37%​	63%​
1984-85 -> 1988-89	Count	11​	19​
1989-90 -> 1993-94	% of Total	37%​	63%​
1989-90 -> 1993-94	Count	11​	19​
1994-95 ->1998-99	% of Total	27%​	73%​
1994-95 ->1998-99	Count	8​	22​
1999-00->2003-04	% of Total	31%​	69%​
1999-00->2003-04	Count	11​	25​
2004-05 ->2008-09	% of Total	33%​	68%​
2004-05 ->2008-09	Count	13​	27​
2009-10 ->2013-14	% of Total	28%​	73%​
2009-10 ->2013-14	Count	11​	29​
2014-15 ->2018-19	% of Total	33%​	68%​
2014-15 ->2018-19	Count	13​	27​
2019-20 ->2024-25	% of Total	50%​	50%​
2019-20 ->2024-25	Count	20​	20​

 

[Snetsrak61]

Here's the fix.

Enrollment is perfectly fine in classifying public schools so no need to do away with that.

In what sense? Certainly not from a competetive balance standpoint. The power imbalance among public schools is only a bit less extreme than among private schools.

We create a committee of Private school coaches/AD's. Then we take the Private playoff qualifiers and divide them into thirds. This Private committee then determines which 33% go into 8A, 7A, and 6A. For numbers not divisible by 3 the extra team(s) go into the larger class first.

There are PLENTY of private schools with no business being as high as 6A. There's still huge enrollment discrepancies that matter every bit as much for private schools as public.

A VERY basic football enrollment would do a great job of moving both strong private and public schools up classifications, with some exceptions. Write a few extra rules to smooth out some of the anomalies and you could fix a lot with an low burden administrative system.

 

[Snetsrak61]

Just to put some numbers behind the swing... Private schools have always punched above their weight in football, but the last 5 years have been dramatically more dominant. I split the data into 5 year periods, and the split was always somewhere around 2/3 public & 1/3 private champs. In last 5 years, it is 50/50.

*Note that I am eyeballing which schools are private & public, possible made an error or 2.

Year (group)		Private	Public
1974-75 ->1978-79	% of Total	32%​	68%​
1974-75 ->1978-79	Count	8​	17​
1979-80 ->1983-84	% of Total	38%​	62%​
1979-80 ->1983-84	Count	11​	18​
1984-85 -> 1988-89	% of Total	37%​	63%​
1984-85 -> 1988-89	Count	11​	19​
1989-90 -> 1993-94	% of Total	37%​	63%​
1989-90 -> 1993-94	Count	11​	19​
1994-95 ->1998-99	% of Total	27%​	73%​
1994-95 ->1998-99	Count	8​	22​
1999-00->2003-04	% of Total	31%​	69%​
1999-00->2003-04	Count	11​	25​
2004-05 ->2008-09	% of Total	33%​	68%​
2004-05 ->2008-09	Count	13​	27​
2009-10 ->2013-14	% of Total	28%​	73%​
2009-10 ->2013-14	Count	11​	29​
2014-15 ->2018-19	% of Total	33%​	68%​
2014-15 ->2018-19	Count	13​	27​
2019-20 ->2024-25	% of Total	50%​	50%​
2019-20 ->2024-25	Count	20​	20​

Right around the time the multiplier waiver program was way eased.

Go back to a strict or no waiver system. Then look at impacts of 1-32 seeding (at least 5A and 6A). Also should study alternatives to W-L/PP seeding system. Then let's see where next 5 years shake out. Would be very interested in seeing return of football enrollment too.

 

[wickerpark wildcat]

In what sense? Certainly not from a competetive balance standpoint. The power imbalance among public schools is only a bit less extreme than among private schools.


There are PLENTY of private schools with no business being as high as 6A. There's still huge enrollment discrepancies that matter every bit as much for private schools as public.

A VERY basic football enrollment would do a great job of moving both strong private and public schools up classifications, with some exceptions. Write a few extra rules to smooth out some of the anomalies and you could fix a lot with an low burden administrative system.

What don't you like of my proposal of classifying according to total kids in program. The more I think about it, the more I like it... essentially self-identifies a school on how important football is to them. Similar to NCAA... Northwestern and Wash U are very similar enrollment, but one has significantly more interest in football, so plays in B1G, while other is d3.

 

[SEHSSTORM1]

What don't you like of my proposal of classifying according to total kids in program. The more I think about it, the more I like it... essentially self-identifies a school on how important football is to them. Similar to NCAA... Northwestern and Wash U are very similar enrollment, but one has significantly more interest in football, so plays in B1G, while other is d3.

This is really interesting. Loyola has 300 playing football and some CPS schools have 20, how would you break up classes to fit 32 in each? Still use 256 to qualify and than separate? What would that look like?

 

[Snetsrak61]

What don't you like of my proposal of classifying according to total kids in program. The more I think about it, the more I like it... essentially self-identifies a school on how important football is to them. Similar to NCAA... Northwestern and Wash U are very similar enrollment, but one has significantly more interest in football, so plays in B1G, while other is d3.

Who said I didn't?

The IHSA should go ask all the CCL/ESCC schools about their own experience trying to weigh competetive balance. I beleive program numbers is one of the metrics they do use in their current bi-annual conference reclasses (though certainly shouldn't be the only one).

Maybe those Catholics would have valuable insights to offer though.

 

[Cross Bones]

In what sense? Certainly not from a competetive balance standpoint. The power imbalance among public schools is only a bit less extreme than among private schools.


There are PLENTY of private schools with no business being as high as 6A. There's still huge enrollment discrepancies that matter every bit as much for private schools as public.

A VERY basic football enrollment would do a great job of moving both strong private and public schools up classifications, with some exceptions. Write a few extra rules to smooth out some of the anomalies and you could fix a lot with an low burden administrative system.

From a competitive balance standpoint enrollment is fine amongst publics. But should something like what happens with privates arise i would also support trying to determine if there is an "unfair" factor and try to address it. A couple years ago the board voted that a number of schools whose colors are red/white/black under achieve so maybe I implement a divider if those are your colors.

The ones that you say have no business in 6A can get better coaching and try harder because apparently make up of enrollment is not actually a factor, just coaching and trying hard. Which apparently doesn't work for basketball.

 

[crusader_of_90]

USA Today ...

In Illinois, private schools outscored public 283-76 in football state title games

The Illinois state championship football games that pitted public schools against private were lopsided, as the private schools cruised, 283-76.

www.usatodayhss.com

 

[King MJ]

You make very good points. However, in Michigan, the Publix are dominating. How is it that it’s actually pretty even in Michigan year to year and yet Illinois seems to always complain about this issue? Maybe public school kids in Illinois just can’t play football at a high level. East Side doesn’t care. Rochester doesn’t care. Both of those examples are diametrically different in community, income level, and geography. Yet both are feared the moment they step onto the field.

To be fair, the population of Michigan is much more spread out than that of Illinois, making it harder to create private school juggernauts.

Also, I think the folks in division 6 and division 7 in Michigan probably have similar comments about Lumen Christi, who like Montini in Illinois, should probably be playing at least 3 classes higher.

 

[DeanOfSelection]

No multiplier waivers (why have multiplier in first place if it isn't implemented fully) , multiplier 2.0, football enrollment, success factor across the board

 

[LTHSALUM76]

Every public school player gets free tuition.

No they don't. Nothing is free. Someone is paying. Wake up.

 

[Quags57]

214 is getting a lot of leftovers recently

Both of those coaches made the playoffs this year. I think many schools would like the taste of that.

 

[Quags57]

What don't you like of my proposal of classifying according to total kids in program. The more I think about it, the more I like it... essentially self-identifies a school on how important football is to them. Similar to NCAA... Northwestern and Wash U are very similar enrollment, but one has significantly more interest in football, so plays in B1G, while other is d3.

I do like that idea. I just don't trust coaches, especially some of those fringe assistants, running kids off.

 

[colin2229]

No they don't. Nothing is free. Someone is paying. Wake up.

You know what I meant. Cmon dog

 

[LTHSALUM76]

You know what I meant. Cmon dog

And you know what I mean. People like you think public schooling is "free." Hell no it isn't.

 

[colin2229]

And you know what I mean. People like you think public schooling is "free." Hell no it isn't.

Not what I’m saying at all.

 

[LTHSALUM76]

Not what I’m saying at all.

I know what you said. Maybe you should read it again.

 

[MC63]

I know what you said. Maybe you should read it again.

Say it ain't so!

 

[colin2229]

I know what you said. Maybe you should read it again.

 

[LTHSALUM76]

Say it ain't so!

Oh...it's so! 😃 😃 Just wondering if you are OK. I see you survived it. Things will be good. You'll see.

 

[Nevada Dude]

I do like that idea. I just don't trust coaches, especially some of those fringe assistants, running kids off.

It would be easily manipulated!

Teams would cut kids left and right

 

[tuccs]

Public school kids tuition is paid in part by the parents who live in district and choose to ALSO pay for their own child’s tuition at the Catholic school…..us Catholics not only are we the giving kind but also martyrs 🤷‍♂️

 

[LTHSALUM76]

Public school kids tuition is paid in part by the parents who live in district and choose to ALSO pay for their own child’s tuition at the Catholic school…..us Catholics not only are we the giving kind but also martyrs 🤷‍♂️

This is why I have always been for school vouchers. Some people would faint if they knew how much money is spent per student in the CPS system. And what are the results? Horrible!

 

[tuccs]

This is why I have always been for school vouchers. Some people would faint if they knew how much money is spent per student in the CPS system. And what are the results? Horrible!

I like the system @jwarigaku talks about where your funding follows you

 

[Snetsrak61]

I like the system @jwarigaku talks about where your funding follows you

Would be a great way to subsidize rich districts from poor districts based on how IL school funding works. Way too much of the funding burden is already on local property taxes and that would just further divide the have v have not districts in IL. Reverse Robin holding.

There's also huge differences in where dollars actually go in each district. In rural districts for example a much larger portion of their budget gets eaten on transportation costs. Does bus money following a student from one district to another adequately bridge the educational spend across each district? Does it consider the average student cost or also what special education services a student requires (more $$).

If Illinois wants to start with dramatically reorganizing educational dollars sourcing and home-rule of districts they should start there. You may find you don't even need vouchers once funding is more equalized and the state has a more active role in how districts are organized.

 

[jwarigaku]

Would be a great way to subsidize rich districts from poor districts based on how IL school funding works. Way too much of the funding burden is already on local property taxes and that would just further divide the have v have not districts in IL. Reverse Robin holding.

There's also huge differences in where dollars actually go in each district. In rural districts for example a much larger portion of their budget gets eaten on transportation costs. Does bus money following a student from one district to another adequately bridge the educational spend across each district? Does it consider the average student cost or also what special education services a student requires (more $$).

If Illinois wants to start with dramatically reorganizing educational dollars sourcing and home-rule of districts they should start there. You may find you don't even need vouchers once funding is more equalized and the state has a more active role in how districts are organized.

Snets,

Because that funding transfer is based on IF the school is a failing district(as determined by the State board or education) it has created a competitive atmosphere and the districts that were/are losing their students/funding are figuring out how to get their houses in order and improve the education experience for the student. Focus on the student is what is really needed and this policy applies the right pressure to the problem.

PS just to be clear the remote rural districts are not the failing districts so your “whatabout” doesn’t really apply.

 

[sac'em]

This is why I have always been for school vouchers. Some people would faint if they knew how much money is spent per student in the CPS system. And what are the results? Horrible!

I'm sure you can pick almost any of the large major city school districts and see low results. Why is that? Becasue they don't get to choose who enrolls in their school. They have to educate EVERYBODY. Even if that person and/or their family does not care about education. And how many of these students would a private school let in? Most states that have vouchers have seen 80%+ of recipients that were already enrolled in a private school. It does not open opportunities for all students. It allows for segregation and the destruction of our public school system.
People think that school choice is the choice of the parent or student, but, it is more the choice of the schools to pick which students they want to have enrolled. You have to APPLY for enrollment. You have to be CHOSEN for enrollment. You have to PAY THE DEPOSIT to hold your spot.
Special education needs = No thanks.
Low Income = No thanks.
Questions:
Why do the private schools not release test scores or other academic data?
Why do they not publish their school discipline?
Why do they not publish background information on their teachers?
Why do they not publish their financials?
Why wouldn't the private schools raise their tuition if everyone coming in has an extra $7500?

I will never trust organizations that want to hide everything they do with the money they get. Especially if the money is public tax money. Be transparent and accountable or STFU about vouchers.

 

[MC63]

I'm sure you can pick almost any of the large major city school districts and see low results. Why is that? Becasue they don't get to choose who enrolls in their school. They have to educate EVERYBODY. Even if that person and/or their family does not care about education. And how many of these students would a private school let in? Most states that have vouchers have seen 80%+ of recipients that were already enrolled in a private school. It does not open opportunities for all students. It allows for segregation and the destruction of our public school system.
People think that school choice is the choice of the parent or student, but, it is more the choice of the schools to pick which students they want to have enrolled. You have to APPLY for enrollment. You have to be CHOSEN for enrollment. You have to PAY THE DEPOSIT to hold your spot.
Special education needs = No thanks.
Low Income = No thanks.
Questions:
Why do the private schools not release test scores or other academic data?
Why do they not publish their school discipline?
Why do they not publish background information on their teachers?
Why do they not publish their financials?
Why wouldn't the private schools raise their tuition if everyone coming in has an extra $7500?

I will never trust organizations that want to hide everything they do with the money they get. Especially if the money is public tax money. Be transparent and accountable or STFU about vouchers.

You answered brilliantly - thank you.

 

[Snetsrak61]

Snets,

Because that funding transfer is based on IF the school is a failing district(as determined by the State board or education) it has created a competitive atmosphere and the districts that were/are losing their students/funding are figuring out how to get their houses in order and improve the education experience for the student. Focus on the student is what is really needed and this policy applies the right pressure to the problem.

PS just to be clear the remote rural districts are not the failing districts so your “whatabout” doesn’t really apply.

I'm honestly a bit confused as to which specific proposal or policy you're referring to with the past and present tense. All I saw earlier was a vague reference to proposing a voucher program to allow district dollars to follow a student from one district to the another. There's a lot of lazy school choice / voucher sentiment out there that doesn't actually think about the sources and uses of how educational dollars are spent and how districts get organized. Can't speak for every state, but voucher / school choice would be/is the epitome of treating the symptom and not the disease.

 

[jwarigaku]

I'm honestly a bit confused as to which specific proposal or policy you're referring to with the past and present tense. All I saw earlier was a vague reference to proposing a voucher program to allow district dollars to follow a student from one district to the another. There's a lot of lazy school choice / voucher sentiment out there that doesn't actually think about the sources and uses of how educational dollars are spent and how districts get organized. Can't speak for every state, but voucher / school choice would be/is the epitome of treating the symptom and not the disease.

Are you a proponent of a free market economy? Just to be clear this is not about money being funneled from public to private, the students would be free to move to other public schools as well. If I remember correctly there was a move to transfer to New Trier from some CPS students. This would have to be considered as well as those students going to Loyola.

It’s about making the schools competitive to serve the students, not the other way around.

 

[sac'em]

Are you a proponent of a free market economy? Just to be clear this is not about money being funneled from public to private, the students would be free to move to other public schools as well. If I remember correctly there was a move to transfer to New Trier from some CPS students. This would have to be considered as well as those students going to Loyola.

It’s about making the schools competitive to serve the students, not the other way around.

Yeah, lets treat public education like the free market. DUMAS

 

[Snetsrak61]

Are you a proponent of a free market economy? Just to be clear this is not about money being funneled from public to private, the students would be free to move to other public schools as well. If I remember correctly there was a move to transfer to New Trier from some CPS students. This would have to be considered as well as those students going to Loyola.

It’s about making the schools competitive to serve the students, not the other way around.

Allowing dollars to go private is a whole other issue. No I personally wouldn't support that. And as we saw recently in KY where such a measure failed there are wide swaths of the state who don't even have real access to a private education nearby. So it's a very urban specific policy to start with.


But even public to public, no, not with how IL funds and organizes disrricts. Letting CPS dollars escape to New Trier isn't going to magically make CPS better. The state can't even fund it's own mandates for Evidence Based Funding formula. Even CPS as a microcosm of IL, they can create high attaining schools, but it's doesn't lift up all schools, it just creates little pockets of success while the have nots fail further.

Look, it would be a boon to me and my neighbors in Elmhurst. We already have a lower relative property tax burden and surely we'd get more dollars to cushion our secure educational funding, probably at a healthy per pupil clip, from nearby poor neighbors in other districts. But it's almost surely asking for a death spiral in those districts. Moving property taxes revenue from poor districts to rich districts isn't solving the fact that educational attainment is heavily tied to economic status and that's exasperated by how IL funds it's educational very heavily from local tax dollars.

 

[Snetsrak61]

Yeah, lets treat public education like the free market. DUMAS

I mean, even if you could create educational free market, it might produce results, but voucher systems certainly aren't free market economics. They're still driven by taxation. They just look to drive revenue from taxation, just diverting between taxing bodies.

Private schools are free market education, and they do provide great educational outcomes by and large, but they are all in some form or another selective, and very poor proxies for a public mandate of education that can't be selective because they're offering a public good.

 

[jwarigaku]

I mean, even if you could create educational free market, it might produce results, but voucher systems certainly aren't free market economics. They're still driven by taxation. They just look to drive revenue from taxation, just diverting between taxing bodies.

Private schools are free market education, and they do provide great educational outcomes by and large, but they are all in some form or another selective, and very poor proxies for a public mandate of education that can't be selective because they're offering a public good.

Well honestly it’s helping the failing districts improve here is PA and more importantly it’s giving the students more opportunities to succeed.

Pressure from outside to improve can actually help. Accountability is everyone’s responsibility, and people collecting teachers salaries and pensions that aren’t accountable should be terminated rather than protected.

 

[sac'em]

Well honestly it’s helping the failing districts improve here is PA and more importantly it’s giving the students more opportunities to succeed.

Pressure from outside to improve can actually help. Accountability is everyone’s responsibility, and people collecting teachers salaries and pensions that aren’t accountable should be terminated rather than protected.

So if private schools get public funding, they should be required to report the same information as public schools and are also held accountable to the same standards as public schools? Also, do their teachers need to be certified like public school teachers?

 

[HRCJR]

So if private schools get public funding, they should be required to report the same information as public schools and are also held accountable to the same standards as public schools? Also, do their teachers need to be certified like public school teachers?

What does teacher certification provide? Isn't the end result of a child's education the best indicator of a teacher?

 

[Snetsrak61]

Well honestly it’s helping the failing districts improve here is PA and more importantly it’s giving the students more opportunities to succeed.

Pressure from outside to improve can actually help. Accountability is everyone’s responsibility, and people collecting teachers salaries and pensions that aren’t accountable should be terminated rather than protected.

So I can't speak to PA obviously. I did find a Forbes article that references a state funding of "around 36% of the costs" which "ranks very low compared to other states"

Illinois, per Illinois Report Card averages 23.9% of state funding. By a couple sources, nation wide the average is about 45% for both state/local shared and 10% federal (plus or minus a couple % depending on source).

Vouchers in the face of that is meaningless. We have extreme outcomes in a very broken model in IL.

Fix the model or figure out more carrots. Trying to get districts to improve via pressure from vouchers is almost certainly a death spiral that local voters can't get themselves out of.

 

[sac'em]

What does teacher certification provide? Isn't the end result of a child's education the best indicator of a teacher?

Certification ensures that teachers have met certain educational and professional standards. This includes demonstrating proficiency in subject matter, teaching methodologies, and classroom management. It guarantees that teachers are adequately prepared to handle the academic and social challenges students may face.
Do you not require your medical professionals to be certified and licensed BEFORE treating your medical needs? Or are you willing to wait for the outcome to decide if it was ok to see the guy or gal who didn't go to medical school?
Do we need police officers to be trained and certified before taking the streets? Or should we just allow anyone who thinks they can stop crime to stop crime?

 

[Cross Bones]

@Snetsrak61 is doing a great job here. I only want to add that education spending cant fix issues that affect education like food scarcity or housing insecurity.

and this relates to football, it's easy to look at the landscape and say "things are the way they are simply because we're better than they" but it's lazy.

 

[MC63]

Arizona passed a voucher system, The people using it most already send tbeir kids to private schools.