Homeschool Participation in Public Interscholastic Athletics

Summary of Article “Interscholastic Athletics in Ohio” Privilege, not a right Menke vs. Ohio High School Athletic Association—”Participation in Interscholastic athletics in and of itself has never been held to be constitutionally protected by civil right” Governed by localities and state athletic association. Rules and regulations

Summary cont. -student rights protected by Federal Regulations (IDEA, Section 504 of Rehabilitation Act, Title IX)

Home School Participation Ohio—originally did not allow participation and then relaxed the policy in 1996 to allow participation IF student takes and attends at least one class on campus at an Ohio High School Athletic Association (OHSAA) member school.

Home School Two bills (1995 and 1997) proposed to change Ohio policy but were not enacted

Supporting Details for Homeschool Policy In 2007, 19 states allowed homeschool participation in public extracurricular activities Court Cases – 1980—New York – 1995—Massachusets – 2005—West Virginia Supports the idea of right of state and locality to decide.

Research and Rigor Adequate for the discussion but not rigorous Referenced court cases and federal regulations, but not in-depth. Good job of addressing both sides.

Homeschool Public School Interscholastic Participation Policy Regulatory Policy Regulatory policies are formalized rules expressed in general terms applied to large groups of people (Fowler, 2009) OHSAA and local school boards establish and regulate policies regarding athletics, eligibility, and enrollment criteria. Applies to the state as a whole.

Strategies promoting support Appeal to larger and more influential constituents (HB 947). State court cases view interscholastic athletics as a privilege not a right. Homeschooling is a choice not a mandate. Ohio is an “individualistic” state, appeals to the economic side (utilitarian). How will ADM and school finances be affected?

Policy Benefits of No Homeschool Participation Maintains continuity and clear criteria. Aids in motivating students to stay in public school. Political ramifications. Maintains differing ideology such as separation of church and state.

Unintended Consequences of No Homeschool Participation Possibly hurt homeschool athletes in rural areas. Politically – loss of support from some constituents. ADM considerations Additional participation issues—where does it end? Ex/ Tax argument

Policy Making—Consider the Climate Know your culture. Majority of states that have been in favor of homeschool interscholastic athletics have been moralistic. Political climates: Mass. (1995) to W. Va. (2005)….. Va. HB 947 (Clarke, Loudon, Fredricksburg, Prince William)

Political Cultures

TraditionalisticMoralisticIndividualistic AlabamaCaliforniaAlaska ArizonaColoradoConnecticut ArkansasIdahoDelaware FloridaIowaHawaii GeorgiaKansasIllinois KentuckyMaineIndiana LouisianaMichiganMaryland MississippiMinnesotaMassachusetts New MexicoMontanaMissouri North CarolinaNew HampshireNebraska OklahomaNorth DakotaNevada South CarolinaOregonNew Jersey TennesseeSouth DakotaNew York TexasUtahOhio VirginiaVermontPennsylvania West VirginiaWashingtonRhode Island WisconsinWyoming

Closer to Home—HB 947 Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia: 1. That the Code of Virginia is amended by adding in Chapter 1 of Title 22.1 a section numbered as follows: § Organizations governing public school interscholastic programs; participation by nonpublic school students. A. No public school shall become a member of any organization or entity whose purpose is to regulate or govern interscholastic programs that does not deem eligible for participation a student who (i) is receiving home instruction pursuant to § , (ii) has demonstrated evidence of progress for two years in compliance with subsection C of § , (iii) is entitled to free tuition in a public school pursuant to §22.1-3, (iv) has not reached the age of 19 by August 1 of the current school year, (v) is an amateur who receives no compensation, but participates solely for the educational, physical, mental, and social benefits of the activity, (vi) complies with all disciplinary rules applicable to all public high school athletes, and (vii) complies with all other rules governing awards, all-star games, parental consents, and physical examinations applicable to all high school athletes. Eligibility shall be limited to participation in interscholastic programs at the school serving the attendance zone in which such student lives. B. Reasonable fees may be charged to such students to cover the costs of participation in such interscholastic programs.

Policy Making—Consider the Timing Is the pressure of passing this bill in Virginia connected to the current financial climate? Key argument—tax dollars

Policy Making—Consider the Consequences What doors does the policy change open? Need for a comprehensive analysis. Cost-benefit Peer collaboration to trouble-shoot

References Legislative Service Commission. (2007, January 8). Members Only: Interscholastic Athletics in Ohio (Issue 1, volume 127). Columbus, Ohio. Hannah K. Wann. Retrieved from scholasticathletics.pdf Fowler, F.C. (2009). Policy Studies for Educational Leaders: An Introduction, third edition. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

References (continued) House Bill 947. (2012, January 12). Elobbyist: Bringing People to the Process. Retrieved from lobbyist.com/gaits/text/521183http://e-