Thought on the proposed HHS weight addition

What do you guys think about this?

With the ever shrinking budgets and all of the financial troubles of the Nation, State and the Local economies the Sports Programs should all be given a long hard look and scaled back until our rather bleak outlook improves.

Yes athletics help build character in our youth, but the onus should be on keeping the schools main agenda, that of educating our kids the only focus the School Board should be focusing on period.

slider I mean this politely, but what cave you been living in? For decades sports has been the ladder of success for inner city kids, or others with lower schoolastic abilities than a retarded dog. And with the muliti-billion dollar sports markets, fans who think they'll go into withdrawls without it, and a black president, it is sports that is going to remain "THE" most important activity in school.

I actually think this is supposed to be paid for completely by private donation if I heard right.

The job of a school is to teach students skills they will need to be productive citizens in society, not turn them into money making machines for a few short years if they happen to be the lucky 1 or 2 % that make it to the Professional level.

Local sports do make the District any money period, they cost the District hundreds of thousands of dollars with zero return..

I agree slider, but society has become sports obsessed.

When push comes to shove, they will pay the bills, the Teachers, Staff and the most important things before they'll pay for activities like sports, period.

Fred Kaufman still make $160K a year?

YES to be paid for by private donation....only

Ratzilla wrote:

I agree slider, but society has become sports obsessed.

isn't that when Rome began the decline???

slider wrote:

When push comes to shove, they will pay the bills, the Teachers, Staff and the most important things before they'll pay for activities like sports, period.

Is that why it was harder to fund the Sternberg than renovations to the football stadium?

LukeTHr wrote:

Ratzilla wrote:

I agree slider, but society has become sports obsessed.

isn't that when Rome began the decline???

Rome had much cooler sports than we do.

Ratzilla wrote:

slider wrote:

When push comes to shove, they will pay the bills, the Teachers, Staff and the most important things before they'll pay for activities like sports, period.

Is that why it was harder to fund the Sternberg than renovations to the football stadium?

Not talking about the head of the daycare on the southwest corner of Hays, Ed is desperate to be like a big time college president, where the sports programs do male money. He is getting his balls squeezed pretty hard right now by the State which is rich, he needs to be knocked down a few rungs on the "look at me" ladder. Looks like his beloved Soccer Stadium will be put on hold for quite awhile, that is unless he figures a way to siphon off money from someother department on campus to pay for it.

slider wrote:

Not talking about the head of the daycare on the southwest corner of Hays,.

Huh do you mean The Childrens center? If so what about it?

If I'm not mistaken, the soccer stadium is still on track and on time. It is the soccer team that will have to wait.
Private funds have already been raised for the stadium. Public funds are needed for the team. Some of that money might come from the savings he is realizing in the debate class cancellation.

luv2cook wrote:

slider wrote:

Not talking about the head of the daycare on the southwest corner of Hays,.

Huh do you mean The Childrens center? If so what about it?

I believe he's talking about the university as a whole... full of a bunch of punk kids. But... I could be wrong.

slider wrote:

Not talking about the head of the daycare on the southwest corner of Hays, Ed is desperate to be like a big time college president, where the sports programs do male money. He is getting his balls squeezed pretty hard right now by the State which is rich, he needs to be knocked down a few rungs on the "look at me" ladder. Looks like his beloved Soccer Stadium will be put on hold for quite awhile, that is unless he figures a way to siphon off money from someother department on campus to pay for it.

slider, I have no idea why you're so negative about Ed Hammond. Oh, wait, I remember. You're negative about everyone and everything except yourself. Especially everything that doesn't directly benefit you.

The following is a post on the Lawrence Journal-World forum from a poster identified as penguin. It was posted on January 15, 2009, in response to another post proposing that the state close Pittsburg State and Fort Hays State. I could not say it better myself, so here it is:

penguin, LJWorld wrote:

Closing FHSU would only send the message that fiscal responsibility is punishable by closure. The model at FHSU for years has been to deal with cuts by expanding the Virtual College. In addition, they are the least expensive of the Regents schools to attend. So closing FHSU would just mean that the parents/ students at FHSU would just have to seek out a higher education from an institution that will charge them more, provide them with higher class sizes, and also kill the Kansas Academy of Math and Science that is to be based at FHSU,Any call for the closure of FHSU shows a real lack of knowledge on what they are trying to do to weather the storm aheard. In fact, they are in a decent position in regards to higher ed cuts. They have already cancelled on-campus summer classes and are attempting to maximize the Virtual College in the Summer. In addition, they have begun the process of cutting down working days/hours during the summer. Long before the word came down on the amount of the cuts ahead, Dr. Hammond has decided to have a game plan for the future.The community of Hays and Ellis County would also be substantially impacted by the closure of FHSU. This in combination with the fact that this is the only 4 year university in Western Kansas would just be ridiculous. FHSU has proven over the years that they can handle the cuts and will work with what money they are provided. They also have done this without massive tuition increases. In fact, FHSU tuition is not much above the tuition I was paying at KU in 2000….yes the year 2000.Do a search on FHSU and this financial crisis and you will see that Dr. Hammond has proposed real action to handle the situation. The same clearly cannot be said for KU and KSU.The leadership on those campuses, Dr. Hemenway and Dr, Wefald, have just taken this time to head for the door during these difficult times. (Granted Wefald was on his way out before this hit, but still the news on their dealing with the situation seems to be pretty quiet)

I don't see anything in penguins comments about FHSU cutting back on sports programs. Go to online education to cut costs so we can fund the sports is the message I read between those lines.

Online courses cost almost 35% more in tuition so that isn't draining the budget at FHSU, No classroom, no utilities, no upkeep and charge the student $480 a class instead of $354 on campus. Pretty smart business move.

Rat, I am currently enrolled at Uncle Ed's daycar and you can see where all of the budget goes, into lavish remodels of buildings and the latest and greatest toys instead of paying the teachers to teach! Half of my classes are based around Powerpoint presentations that you have to go to Blackboard to watch, the younger Prof's haven't a clue how to actually give a lecture, but they know Powerpoint and how to get around having to show up and teach.

Where is the interaction if you don't understand something within his/her Powerpoint. Oh, you try and make an appointment to see them in their Office, but most are never around during their scheduled "Office Hours" ..... convienent and really proffessional. Many classes are being taught by Graduate Assistants!

Not to be negative but but can we get back to the topic of the thread? I think we all pretty much know each others opinions on school sports and fast Eddie. I really just wanted to know if people felt HHS needed to be building a new weight room in these economic times?

It is an unnecessary expenditure regardless if it payed for by private donations. It sets a very bad precident when the School District is struggling with declining enrollment, decreased funding from the State and the inevitable increase toTaxpayers locally.

If they lose much more funding then it is joining to be Staff then programs that will be the first to fall under the knife. Yeah, lets take people's jobs and then over work the remaning Staff.

See I wondered about that as well. Yeah the parents are paying for it out of their pocket but whos going to pay for the supervision thats going to be necessary once its built?

I can tell you what the weight room is all about. Smith Center attributes alot of the football teams success to a rigorous weight program. Do they need it? Probably not. Oh and slider, yeah I know what you mean about putting so much money into cosmetic improvements at FHSU.

luv2cook wrote:

See I wondered about that as well. Yeah the parents are paying for it out of their pocket but whos going to pay for the supervision thats going to be necessary once its built?

What supervision does the current weight room have?

Dont know, dont use it but I think its required by law if Im not mistaken.

Just wondering if the current supervisor would be able to supervise the new building, might not be a question on who will supervise it. The only thing that I see hurting the school's budget would be maintenance and utilities.

Good or bad, school sports are things that bring schools and communities together when they are successful, when they are bad, they tend to put division in the school. More attention to the school in a positive light can't hurt. If the Football and other programs start to have success, more people might come to the games and those other activities that have fundraisers at the sporting events could probably gain.

Take the football frenzy tickets that had proceeds for the Athletic Boosters and another department (sorry I don't remember the exact department, I want to say music or drama, but it was nonathletic related), they were able to raise a ton of money. I would think that if more people attend the football games (where a majority of these were sold) then they may have sold even more and raised even more (again a portion not going to athletics).

Again, Good or Bad, sports unite people like no other. I can't really think of something else that people rally behind.

They do need more room to hide and smoke dope or have sex with teachers.....who needs supervisors.

I think this is the wrong time to be building a weight room. They have one, whether or not it is what they want, and right now we're looking at a very uncertain financial future. There are far more sensible ways to spend money on our kids. Even if built with donated funds, I'd rather see that money go to enriching the school library or scholarships for kids so they can go to college and become more employable.

Gotta keep focused Celtic. All anyone talks about around here are the great gods of football at Smith Center who just happen to have an aggressive weight program. After all, why would anyone care more about an education than being the champs?

Why can't they have the same aggressive weight program with the weight room they have now?

you really got to ask that question. will a new one improve their program?

do the kids here have the same motivation, drive or disipline to be a Smith Center type program?

those are a bunch of farm kids that have the fire in them and the coaching staff to push them, from what I've seen from my alma mater that is one thing that has been lacking!

I agree slider. They could make weights out of concrete filled coffee cans and 5 gallon buckets and use them aggressively. But think about it. Who's more likely to be memorialized and celebrated at their former schools, Accomplished ball players, or accomplished scientists?

what's sad is this is a very important subject

Ratzilla wrote:

I agree slider. They could make weights out of concrete filled coffee cans and 5 gallon buckets and use them aggressively. But think about it. Who's more likely to be memorialized and celebrated at their former schools, Accomplished ball players, or accomplished scientists?

You mean like Jack Kilby Square in Great Bend?
Stephen Hawley of Salina?

This weight room upgrade has been in the works from sometime, they are just trying to capture the buzz around this new coach. The coach has even said LaCrosses weight room is better than Hays High's. The problem isn't motivation, there are several football and basketball kids that they or their families pay for them to work out at the center or downtown. It's about opportunity, kids aren't going to want to work out on equipment that is crap and joining some of these gyms isn't something that some of people can do (the center is almost $60 a month I believe). Further, the kids getting to work out together helps them continue to build a bond and friendship that is need to build a team and not just a bunch of individuals.

Now I don't know if a new weight room will build the aggressive weight program, but you have to give them the tools or we may never know.

And this argument that people should make private donations toward the library or scholarships instead of the weight program is crazy. People aren't going to do it. I think its dumb that Immaculate Heart of Mary is building a new church when that money could have gone into upgrading the school and the existing church, but people weren't going to donate for that. It's their money and they of course can donate towards what they choose.

As I hear it, they haven't raised very much money for this new weight facility. They have been trying to sell these march mayhem tickets and haven't sold nearly as many as they thought. Then they are trying to sell these bricks that you can get engraved and those haven't sold that well either.

Justoo wrote:

Ratzilla wrote:

I agree slider. They could make weights out of concrete filled coffee cans and 5 gallon buckets and use them aggressively. But think about it. Who's more likely to be memorialized and celebrated at their former schools, Accomplished ball players, or accomplished scientists?

You mean like Jack Kilby Square in Great Bend?
Stephen Hawley of Salina?

Who, from out of the area, will drive by those signs and say, "Yeah, I remember that name." vs. down near Emporia, where there are signs memorializing Knute Rockne's plane crash... people recognize that name almost immediately.


I think it's a shame that so much emphasis is put on sports rather than academics... Always.

I always wondered why not Music and art too? They create a balance also...

Owlg8tr wrote:

I always wondered why not Music and art too? They create a balance also...

Personally, I'd love to see more money going to both things. Art and music are things you can enjoy and use throughout your life to make it much more pleasant and they have career connections as well. My DH will soon be an art teacher and he is worried that the economy will mean cutting art programs, thus making it difficult for him to find a job.

Justoo wrote:

Ratzilla wrote:

I agree slider. They could make weights out of concrete filled coffee cans and 5 gallon buckets and use them aggressively. But think about it. Who's more likely to be memorialized and celebrated at their former schools, Accomplished ball players, or accomplished scientists?

You mean like Jack Kilby Square in Great Bend?
Stephen Hawley of Salina?

I hadn't heard of those. Which is kinda my point. As suzyr says, who doesn't know Knute Rockne? When was the last time you heard Jack Kilby or Stephen Hawley mentioned on TV? I've heard Knute Rockne mentioned numerous times over the years. It's all about being entertained. Music and screen stars rank with sports figures too.

I asked a fairly bright kid attending FHSU once who Mussolini, Hirohito, Benedict Arnold, Rudolf Hess, and Hitler were and he only recognized Hitler, calling him "That Nazi Dude". But he knew sports personalities and could sing that rap song about big butts word for word.

Ratzilla wrote:

Justoo wrote:

Ratzilla wrote:

I agree slider. They could make weights out of concrete filled coffee cans and 5 gallon buckets and use them aggressively. But think about it. Who's more likely to be memorialized and celebrated at their former schools, Accomplished ball players, or accomplished scientists?

You mean like Jack Kilby Square in Great Bend?
Stephen Hawley of Salina?

I hadn't heard of those. Which is kinda my point. As suzyr says, who doesn't know Knute Rockne? When was the last time you heard Jack Kilby or Stephen Hawley mentioned on TV? I've heard Knute Rockne mentioned numerous times over the years. It's all about being entertained. Music and screen stars rank with sports figures too.

I asked a fairly bright kid attending FHSU once who Mussolini, Hirohito, Benedict Arnold, Rudolf Hess, and Hitler were and he only recognized Hitler, calling him "That Nazi Dude". But he knew sports personalities and could sing that rap song about big butts word for word.

And that is probably the sadest comment on our present day society. People that really matter go unnoticed and those who make millions playing kid's "stick and ball sports" are the bomb. Twisted perspective, most stars of modern sports role models are cheaters, drug users and social deviants but are the most well known. Rap stars are gang bangers, drug users and really bad role models but are the most well known.

Our society sucks for the recognition factor and it skewed perspective.

While sports stars and other celebrities are most recognised by today's youth, history will tell a different tale. People like Alan Turing, Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates, Martin Luther King, Susan B. Anthony, Sandra Day O'Connor and many others will be remembered long after the "celebrities" have been forgotten.

After all, we remember Nero, Socrates and Plato, not the gladiators of that day.

CelticDragon wrote:

While sports stars and other celebrities are most recognised by today's youth, history will tell a different tale. People like Alan Turing, Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates, Martin Luther King, Susan B. Anthony, Sandra Day O'Connor and many others will be remembered long after the "celebrities" have been forgotten.

After all, we remember Nero, Socrates and Plato, not the gladiators of that day.

I'll bet that if you showed 1000 randomly chosen high school kids pictures of all those people along with pictures of Muhammad Ali and Michael Jordan, I could tell you which two would be the most recognized.

CelticDragon wrote:

Even if built with donated funds, I'd rather see that money go to enriching the school library

I agree with this, the school library out at HHS is pretty sad in my opinion.

CelticDragon wrote:

While sports stars and other celebrities are most recognised by today's youth, history will tell a different tale. People like Alan Turing, Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates, Martin Luther King, Susan B. Anthony, Sandra Day O'Connor and many others will be remembered long after the "celebrities" have been forgotten.

After all, we remember Nero, Socrates and Plato, not the gladiators of that day.

Those persons are, or were celebrities of their time or we wouldn't remember them. A good example is that we know Oppenheimer as the father of the atomic bomb, but there were numerous other brilliant scientists involved and I can't think of one name. Just one man got the celebrity.

Who discovered X-rays, penicillin, the vaccines for small pox, and polio? Who invented the gasoline engine, MRI? Can you name them all without looking them up?

And as The Other One says, kids won't recognize most of them before a sports hero.

I know kids who can tell you every quarterback on every NFL team, or ID any music star by their photo that couldn't ID Bill Gates or Sandra Day O'Connor's photo if they had to.

Ratzilla wrote:

CelticDragon wrote:

While sports stars and other celebrities are most recognised by today's youth, history will tell a different tale. People like Alan Turing, Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates, Martin Luther King, Susan B. Anthony, Sandra Day O'Connor and many others will be remembered long after the "celebrities" have been forgotten.

After all, we remember Nero, Socrates and Plato, not the gladiators of that day.

Those persons are, or were celebrities of their time or we wouldn't remember them. A good example is that we know Oppenheimer as the father of the atomic bomb, but there were numerous other brilliant scientists involved and I can't think of one name. Just one man got the celebrity.

Who discovered X-rays, penicillin, the vaccines for small pox, and polio? Who invented the gasoline engine, MRI? Can you name them all without looking them up?

And as The Other One says, kids won't recognize most of them before a sports hero.

I know kids who can tell you every quarterback on every NFL team, or ID any music star by their photo that couldn't ID Bill Gates or Sandra Day O'Connor's photo if they had to.

Rat, you hit the nail onthe head. That is the problem with schools today, they don't teach history, and science and math like they should. Kids now days are taught what it takes get a good score on a ACT or SAT College Entrance Exam. That and to keep those scores high for the No Child Left Behind Bullshit quota's instead of teaching, half of a school year is wasting prepping for the State Assessment tests in Elementary Grades.

Do you really want them to drill kids over and over and over on who the scientist was that discovered penicillin? What does that really help....HOW does that help anyone? The method and the science of how penicillin was discovered is important but who really cares that it was some Scottish dude. Kids today aren't any different the kids of any era, they will always focus on pop culture regardless of what is taught in school. Kids are going to focus on what they deem important and not what a teacher does. I can almost guarantee that we've all learned something just to get by a test and then forgot it. That's the whole premise between the TV show Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader.

Is it right? Probably not, but let's not act like this has been going on for 50 years. No Child Left Behind is crap and has shown to be ineffective, teachers hate it, and smarter students are actually somewhat held back, but that isn't the reason some kid doesn't know who Alexander Fleming is.

Peggy Fleming's husband ?

http://www.peggyfleming.net/

lilchefed wrote:

Do you really want them to drill kids over and over and over on who the scientist was that discovered penicillin? What does that really help....HOW does that help anyone? The method and the science of how penicillin was discovered is important but who really cares that it was some Scottish dude. Kids today aren't any different the kids of any era, they will always focus on pop culture regardless of what is taught in school. Kids are going to focus on what they deem important and not what a teacher does. I can almost guarantee that we've all learned something just to get by a test and then forgot it. That's the whole premise between the TV show Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader.

Is it right? Probably not, but let's not act like this has been going on for 50 years. No Child Left Behind is crap and has shown to be ineffective, teachers hate it, and smarter students are actually somewhat held back, but that isn't the reason some kid doesn't know who Alexander Fleming is.

I don't believe you understand. It's not that they need each individual who has accomplished things drilled into their heads. The point is that sports heros and celebrities "are" drilled into their heads. The media does it in both cases, and in the case of sports heros the schools and the kids own parents are just as guilty of hero worship.

I know a grown man so obsessed with K-State ballgames that he lies to everyone and says he used to play for the team. The nation is so obsessed with sports that we have special segments of the newscasts and newspapers devoted to it. Sports has become the new religion. And they have countless shows and news stories following the lives of celebrities.

Kids are obsessed with sports and celebrities because adults who have nothing better to do than worship someone else have taught them to. Kids don't often dream of being a famous scientist, they dream of fame and fortune because their fathers dream is for their sons to be a superbowl winning quarterbacks and their mothers dream is to see their daughters being interviewed by Oprah.

Excessive sports hero and celebrity worship is the subject, not adding worship of the guy who discovered penicillin to it.

I disagree...It's always been my dream for my child to be the next Jonas Salk

fescue wrote:

I disagree...It's always been my dream for my child to be the next Jonas Salk

Is he one of the Jonas Brothers?

What is the no child left behind thing??I always hear about it and have never caught anyone has ever said what it is.

Quote :

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-110), often abbreviated in print as NCLB and sometimes shortened in pronunciation to "nicklebee",[1] is a United States federal law (Act of Congress) that was originally proposed by President George W. Bush on January 23, 2001, immediately after taking office.[2] Congress based its legislation on this "blueprint" proposed by the president. The legislation was coauthored by Representatives John Boehner (R-OH) and George Miller (D-CA) and Senators Judd Gregg (R-NH) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA), and signed by President Bush. The law reauthorized a number of federal programs aiming to improve the performance of U.S. primary and secondary schools by increasing the standards of accountability for states, school districts, and schools, as well as providing parents more flexibility in choosing which schools their children will attend. Additionally, it promoted an increased focus on reading and reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). The Act, introduced as HR 1 during the 107th Congress, [3] was passed in the House of Representatives on May 23, 2001[4], United States Senate on June 14, 2001[5] and signed into law on January 8, 2002.
NCLB is the latest federal legislation (another was Goals 2000) which enacts the theories of standards-based education reform, formerly known as outcome-based education, which is based on the belief that setting high standards and establishing measurable goals can improve individual outcomes in education. The Act requires states to develop assessments in basic skills to be given to all students in certain grades, if those states are to receive federal funding for schools. NCLB does not assert a national achievement standard; standards are set by each individual state, in line with the principle of local control of schools and in order to comply with the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which specifies that powers not granted to the federal government nor forbidden to state governments are reserved powers of the individual states.
The Act also requires that the schools distribute the name, home phone number and address of every student enrolled to military recruiters and institutions of higher education, unless the student (or the student's parent) specifically opts out.[6]
The effectiveness and desirability of NCLB's measures are hotly debated. It is very difficult to assess the effectiveness of the act per se, because it applied to all states making it difficult to infer what would have happened without the act. However, analyses of the state accountability systems that were in place before NCLB indicate that accountability for outcomes led to faster growth in achievement for the states that introduced such systems.[7] The direct analysis of state test scores before and after enactment of NCLB also supports its positive impact.[8] A primary criticism asserts that NCLB could reduce effective instruction and student learning because it may cause states to lower achievement goals and motivate teachers to "teach to the test." A primary supportive claim asserts that systematic testing provides data that shed light on which schools are not teaching basic skills effectively, so that interventions can be made to improve outcomes for all students while reducing the achievement gap for disadvantaged and disabled students.[9]
Over the time of this law, Congress increased federal funding of education, from $42.2 billion in 2001 to $54.4 billion in 2007. No Child Left Behind received a 40.4% increase from $17.4 billion in 2001 to $24.4 billion. The funding for reading quadrupled from $286 million in 2001 to $1.2 billion. [10] A 2008 study from the Department of Education, “Reading First Impact Study: Interim Report,” analyzes the performance of students in 12 states who were in grades one to three during the 2004-5 and 2005-6 school years and concluded that the Reading First Program, a major billion dollar a year NCLB effort, had proven "ineffective." A final report on the impacts from 2004-2007 (three school years with Reading First funding) and on the relationships between changes in instructional practice and student reading comprehension is expected in late 2008.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Child_Left_Behind_Act