<p>It’s not just the great districts trying to find non-residents. We live in a rural crappy small public school system. When S1 was in 3rd grade, the GC followed home his friend, who owned a rental house in the system, but now lived 1/2 mile over the border. Kicked the family out of the school system.</p>
<p>Almost all school corps in Indiana stopped tuition for non-residents a couple of years ago. If the student is accepted by the sup’t and is enrolled by the “count” day (early Sept) then there is no tuition. Transportation is provided only to residents. Well…in most cases. One school system in Indianapolis is charging $450/student for trans. this year.</p>
<p>We also have the IHSAA (state athletic assoc)get involved when they suspect a student transfers for “athletic” reasons. I am not sure how this is now justified since anyone can go anywhere.</p>
<p>As for “better” schools, Indiana now has one of the country’s most expansive voucher systems. Unfortunately, this doesn’t much help rural residents as there are not private/charter schools within driving distance. City residents had many more choices anyway The state is in the process of taking over ~5 continually under-performing schools.</p>
Gee, what a mystery. We have a post about a mother being prosecuted for lying in order to get her kids into a public school they were not entitled to attend by state law governing the matter, followed by a patently false claim that if her kids were “illegal immigrants they would be able to stay in the better schools.” There’s no exception for immigrants allowing them to attend schools outside of their residence district. No one has proposed there should be. The only “issue” in which immigrant children feature is the question of whether they should be driven out of attending the schools in the districts in which they and their families live and contribute to by paying the local taxes which fund them.</p>
<p>The story had nothing to do with immigrants - of any kind. Spideygirl was the one who brought it up, with a patently false, ideologically skewed swipe at people who SPideygirl, for her own reasons, felt it was appropriate to drag into the discussion.</p>
<p>If you want to talk about attendance boundaries, talk about attendance boundaries. If you want to talk about immigration policy, talk about immigration policy. Fine with me. But don’t expect to use one issue as a soapbox to take a sneaky swipe at the other without being called on it. That’s the only hypocrisy being demonstrated in this thread.</p>
<p>kluge: Thank you for trying to stay on subject. Again, the mother and the the issue in question is: illegal residence in a SCHOOL district. It is NOT illegal residency/immigration TO the United States.</p>
<p>Exactly, Sewhappy. And Kluge’s posts in this thread have give that point a whole lot of support.</p>
<p>Too good not to repost twice:
Kluge
</p>
<p>I am still waiting, Kluge, for you to “apply the very same reasoning and big-heartedness to the children of US citizens whose parents are trying to get them a better education. Where are your long, sympathetic posts on their behalf?”</p>
<p>It is outrageous. Kids have made friends, and they have an identity and familiarity in a certain school. Suddenly they are kicked out and sent somewhere else. This is so disruptive to educational goals and it is anything but child-centered. If the parents break a rule, the kids should not have to pay for it. School districts should not be allowed to kick students out whose parents have snuck them in. </p>
<p>Parents attempting to practice what is basically a form of civil disobedience (in order to access better schools) are being accused of theft, but really they are VICTIMS of theft. It should be illegal to force a child to spend year after year in an underperforming school. If someone has to be arrested, it should be the people who steal the dreams of little children, and who prevent them from enjoying the right they have to an education.</p>
<p>Though I live in Indiana now, my DS elementary school years were spent in Berkeley. The taxpayers there paid a great deal more money for the Berkeley School Excellence Project - homeowners were taxed for enrichment programs, funding art, music teachers, etc. As a result, there was a real backlash about the hundreds of kids who were lying about residency, especially during high school years. The district experienced overcrowded schools, disciplinary problems and less parent involvement. Do I think someone should be jailed? No. Do I think they should have to reimburse the school district? Absolutely.</p>
Another poster said there should be no punishment for this activity, and that the kids should just be sent back to their proper school. Both of these approaches remove any disincentive to enrolling kids out of their district and open the door to far more illegal enrollments. Unless there is some punishment for an illegal act, we undermine the very concept of illegality and turn the school district boundaries into a joke. I agree that our methods of funding school are absurd and the disparities between districts are unsupportable, but the solution is not to wink at the fraudulent theft of services.</p>
<p>OK, Spideygirl, since you appear to be struggling with the basics: </p>
<p>It’s not illegal to attend elementary school in the school district in which you live even if you’re not a U.S. citizen. All children who reside in the district can legally attend the school, regardless of federal immigration status.</p>
<p>It** is** illegal to attend a school in a school district in which you do not reside, regardless of whether you a re a U.S. citizen or not.</p>
<p>Why is that so difficult for you to get a grip on? One thing is illegal, the other isn’t. </p>
<p>Okay, I actually do understand why you elect not to get it: You are outraged that unauthorized immigrants are not hunted down and punished, and are actually allowed to receive the benefit of things they pay for. Who cares if they live and work in a given school district, supporting it with their taxes? They weren’t born on U.S. soil, and those of us who were born here have changed the rules since our ancestors got here, so the newcomers should not be allowed to utilize the local resources they pay for like born-in-the-USA folks - including those who don’t live in the district and don’t pay for those schools. It doesn’t matter that immigration status has no actual relationship with schooling, and that jumping district lines does - we’re talking about illegals, right?</p>
<p>Nah - no hypocrisy there, right? You’re just looking for an “even-handed” demonstration of concern for children, right? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>spideygirl: It seems like you are supporting equal access to quality public education for all students, or at least children of legal residents. Right now differing property tax levels impact quality of schools. In this particular case, are you okay with *other people’s money<a href=“taxes”>/i</a> paying for education in districts where the tax payers don’t live?</p>
<p>I grew up in the same community where I live today. My parents rented an apartment so that I could attend, what was then, one of the best schools in the nation. My husband and I have been more fortunate and purchased a home here so THAT OUR CHILDREN could attend a better public school.</p>
<p>But I know the area. I was the team mother for a high school sport. I had to make a call/address list. One of the girls on the team gave me an address that I was VERY familiar with: my old apartment house and my apartment. I asked her a question whether something was still there. The girl stared at me blankly She didn’t live there and never had. Did I turn her in? No. Did she contribute something to a championship team? Yes. Did she take the spot away from someone, in district, that would have enjoyed the opportunity to compete on this championship team? Yes. Was she lying every day that she was in school? Yes. </p>
<p>And in the kumbaya world: Life isn’t fair. If you lie and cheat to get something, even as noble as an education, you are still a liar and a thief. And sometimes, you get caught and have to pay the consequences.</p>
<p>Spideygirl: I agree with you that it is horrible for children to be stuck in bad schools. But this statement makes me wonder whether you think that the people who run these schools know how to fix them but just aren’t, out of some evil intent:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A well-performing district can handle some children who attend illegally, but at a cetain point, too many extra children would drain the resources and mean that the school cannot perform as well.</p>
<p>I don’t have time to read through, and I’m not sure if this thread is about immigration or school districts, but someone just told me there are places where you can pay to have your child to attend a school outside of their district. Has anybody heard of that?</p>
<p>Shrinkwrap, it was possible in California and possible in Indiana. The catch (at least in CA) is that both school districts had to sign off on it. So, for instance, even if Berkeley was willing to accept the fist-grader who lives on the boarder, Oakland would ahve to sign a consent form. Most districts didn’t want to give up the money, so they would deny the request. Also, the accepting district would proces each situation individually. For instance an elementary student whose parents work close to the local school might be accepted, but a high schooler who is failing and in discipinary trouble would not be accepted, even with the money.</p>
<p>The federal government (you and me) pays on the average $10,000 dollars (2009) annually for your child’s education (and up to $18,000 in some areas). I have spent a bit more than that for a private school education for my kid., I figure I’m paying double along the way…
Tell me why every child shouldn’t be getting the private school experience with the money being spent.</p>
<p>Of course, is it really because of parental pressure that the better school districts are getting stricter? Some parents might not be too accepting of a lot of [racial / ethnic / social-class stereotype] students from the other side of the tracks “invading” “their” school district.</p>
<p>No ucbalumnus it is not necessarily that AT ALL. My white kids were minority in one of the most fashionable and famous school districts in the world. It would be naturally integrated because…oh wait, lots of successful people come in lots of colors and religions. (Years ago I will agree the district was 95 percent white.) It is totally about, in our case, budgets and lying and many people who don’t live here not having a vested interest in our community. And special services (always underfunded) seemed to have a lot of out of district kids.</p>
The state is in the process of taking over ~5 continually under-performing schools.</p>
You’re just looking for an “even-handed” demonstration of concern for children, right? :rolleyes:</p>