Northwest Ohio Realignment
- Thread starter ghsknightsfan
- Start date
bluedevilbuckeye
Active member
I have heard rumblings in the past couple years of Willard wanting to join the N10 but would need to find another partner that the league would agree on to make it work. I wonder if EC possibly joining the SBC would motivate Willard a little more to leave. I would like to see Willard and Hopewell join the N10, HL having an obvious tie to the old MAL members SE, Mohawk, and Carey
I have no idea, but maybe for that reason the league would put them in the Lake.
It's even worse when you consider some of these schools have worse general academic outcomes (standardized test scores, college bound student retention, real scholarship dollars received, etc.) than most of the suburban publics.
FremontKeith
Well-known member
People moaning about the distance between Toledo and Tiffin. LOL
People moaning about the traffic in Toledo and Tiffin. Hysterical
Back in the day, I can recall driving from Fremont to Lorain before rt 2 was a freeway. We actually drove through Huron and Vermilion to get there. We survived!
Imagine back in the pre-freeway days when for example, Ross played AT Portsmouth. No one whined about the distance, they traveled the whole distance and lived.
Complaining about having to drive for more than 45 minutes is pretty freaking entitled.
People moaning about the traffic in Toledo and Tiffin. Hysterical
Back in the day, I can recall driving from Fremont to Lorain before rt 2 was a freeway. We actually drove through Huron and Vermilion to get there. We survived!
Imagine back in the pre-freeway days when for example, Ross played AT Portsmouth. No one whined about the distance, they traveled the whole distance and lived.
Complaining about having to drive for more than 45 minutes is pretty freaking entitled.
Johnson&Johnson
Active member
This is likely the landing spot on the surface but competitive balance #s will be a discussion, I'm sure. Would the Bay rather have EC or Perkins/Bellevue?
CCHS93
Well-known member
The suburban publics have a high percentage of upper middle class and above families. That is a leading indicator of student success. The schools there (whichever 'there', you are referring to) are good for the most part.
Where can one compare the scores or other metrics between private and public schools?
The Blade had a big comparison a couple of years ago when all of the Covid flight stuff was happening. Obviously since privates aren't beholden to State standards or State reporting, so it's more of a crap shoot of where you can find things.
I work at the University of Toledo, and I can tell you that SFS and Central are both in our yellow band (Caution) with regards to retention and general student preparedness for any student who attends based on performance assessments of past students.
eastisbest
Well-known member
That's not correct for the voucher students. It's these that vouchered from public schools we are discussing, since they are the only measurables of value-added that can even close to legit be compared. It's not possible nor fair to compare a student that matriculated from a parochial and may be on voucher or any student not on voucher, who may or may not have to meet the same entrance mandates. There would be no indication of relative performance on value added. Claiming the inferiority of the private system based only on personal experience with the massive number of social idiots that graduated is not scientific.
That's why the numbers are so gratifying, lol.None of which was one of my main points anyhow, except as someone attempts to broach the superiority topic. And MY points only become issue to me, when the narrative of "failed public schools" comes out the mouth of those trying to promote their private school by negation, those that know they're rigging the game and seem to have lost all moral track they were suppose to learn in their Catholic education. Those that recognize there is a different playing field and that they refuse to play on the real field and respect those that do, we get along great even as they continue their reprehensible practice.
No, I will not ever be for providing public money to private business without equitable public oversight and I find any practice or anyone that supports it to be cringy at the least and morally questionable when the morals they claim to preach contradict the practice of restricting services to the advantaged, let alone doing that on public money.
Yes.
CC Track Fan
Well-known member
No the leading indicator of student success is being born and raised in a two parent household. Many times that goes hand and hand with high percentage of upper middle class and above families.
CCHS93
Well-known member
I agree for sure. Good call. But they are both right there.
irish_buffalo
Well-known member
Spot on.That's not correct for the voucher students. It's these that vouchered from public schools we are discussing, since they are the only measurables of value-added that can even close to legit be compared. It's not possible nor fair to compare a student that matriculated from a parochial and may be on voucher or any student not on voucher, who may or may not have to meet the same entrance mandates. There would be no indication of relative performance on value added. Claiming the inferiority of the private system based only on personal experience with the massive number of social idiots that graduated is not scientific.
None of which was one of my main points anyhow, except as someone attempts to broach the superiority topic. And MY points only become issue to me, when the narrative of "failed public schools" comes out the mouth of those trying to promote their private school by negation, those that know they're rigging the game and seem to have lost all moral track they were suppose to learn in their Catholic education. Those that recognize there is a different playing field and that they refuse to play on the real field and respect those that do, we get along great even as they continue their reprehensible practice.
No, I will not ever be for providing public money to private business without equitable public oversight and I find any practice or anyone that supports it to be cringy at the least and morally questionable when the morals they claim to preach contradict the practice of restricting services to the advantaged, let alone doing that on public money.
You have any statistical evidence to support that, or is it your opinion?
BirdDog10
Well-known member
It doesn't take a statistical genius to figure out kids from 2 parent households generally have much more "success" than kids without traditional homes.
But that wasn't what he said.
If two parent family is more important than socio-economic status in determining academic success, as claimed, then children from poor, two parent families in rural backwaters should do better academically than children from wealthy single parent families in affluent metropolitan neighborhoods.
I doubt very much that is true.
Last edited:
Bruce Monnin
Well-known member
Years ago I was a substitute teacher and one of the grades in one of the schools I worked at was the worst class discipline and academic results wise (and also team athletics wise) that had been through the school in recent memory. One day there were a bunch of papers on a table in the teacher's lounge, and it was a bunch of statistics from the state. Someone showed me a paper that showed that the "trouble" class had over twice the number of students from one parent households than any of the other 11 classes. it was an incredible statistical anomaly.
CC Track Fan
Well-known member
It is my opinion/personal experience. It is hard to separate the two because a long time married couple almost always at a mucher higher economic status for a many of reasons. I did a quick search and found this telling article.
Link
Among study highlights:
- Black children in single-parent homes were 3.5 times more likely to live in poverty compared to peers who lived with both parents in a first marriage. Those in stepfamilies are 2.5 times more likely to be poor.
- Odds of Black young adults graduating from college were almost 70% higher for those raised by their own two parents.
- Among young Black adults, those raised in a single-parent or otherwise nonintact home were nearly twice as likely to be incarcerated by their late 20s, compared to peers who grew up in intact families.
The pattern holds true in white families, too: 47% in intact families earn a degree, compared to 23% from single-parent households and 18% from stepfamilies. And 5% of young adults in intact white families have been incarcerated, compared to 12% raised in other family structures.
Among white women, more graduate from college than white men, while fewer have ever been jailed. Those growing up with their biological parents fare better than those in other family structures on both measures and for both genders.
Wang said one reason two-parent families do better is access to more resources, including both time and often money.
“But I think there’s more to the story. Having two parents taking care, spending more parental time and offering more emotional support, helps. And probably the parents are more likely to work with the school, to find opportunities for their children and be attentive to the kids’ needs,” she said. “All those factors matter, not just income. I think the family structure when they’re growing up is highly related to the children’s outcomes. So I think we also need to pay attention to the family part, not only on the income part.”
Isn't single mom the leading cause of poverty?
Bruce Monnin
Well-known member
It was the last I heard, about a decade ago.
CCHS93
Well-known member
Income level, education level, and home situation are very much in the top few of indicators.
For sure, though there is a ton of evidence being found that the primary indicator of a person's success is "grit" which can be developed through a multitude of different avenues. The largest subsection of high motivation students in secondary and post secondary education is what many are calling "uplifters" (children/young adults who are motivated solely by the will to avoid the issues their parents have faced). To put it in terms of the forum we're on, kids who are using sports to pull themselves out of terrible situations, tend to perform better than those who are just doing it to have fun (Central vs. a school like Northview). Now external motivation and culture, as in a community where you are made to do your best regardless, whether through peer-pressure or general comparison or by family pressure, tends to win out in the end because it is much easier for someone to stay at their elevation than to fight to get there.
Extrinsic motivation (the primary development factor in determining grit) is more likely in a home with family members who value education or have good paying jobs in fields that require work ethic or a high level of education, but it's not always the case. There were plenty of examples in the 70s and 80s of children of parents who worked in skilled trades or active labor who were able to outperform children of parents who were more highly educated, specifically by Dweck, which was directly attributed to the latent ability to self-motivate vs. having to be motivated...sorry, student motivation/educational psychology is kind of my thing.
green_genes
Well-known member
See Eastwood v. Bowling Green in just about anything...
Maple_City_Fan
Well-known member
Lake
What are you referring to?
Elyria Catholic applied to the Sandusky Bay Conference recently according to reports. Would create a 5-6-8 setup which is super sustainable.
Maple_City_Fan
Well-known member
Whether Lake or Bay, Elyria Catholic has a little history with P erkins, Huron, Norwalk, and Bellevue although latter in Postseason, and last meeting 35 years ago.
I still wouldn't rule out Lex and Madison Comprehensive to SBC as well
I still wouldn't rule out Lex and Madison Comprehensive to SBC as well
I can see that from a cultural fit and size standpoint.
I need to get a map out though before I give it my “yes” vote.