New OIA Transfer Rule Goes Into Effect Next School Year

[unpaid]

Don't see the point in bashing the OIA .They don't have an income stream from colleges looking for college-level talent.
The parents and kids get that income ,not the BIIF,OIA,ILH,MIL,or KIF. Some of the loudest complainers here about fairness and free markets don't get it....it;s you and your kids and the colleges....that is the money flow. The high school leagues your kids play in aren't involved in that monetary loop.

As another poster has said,camps and combines have become very important in football, clubs like AAU and Asics more important for volleyball,soccer,hoops , etc..High schools are not the be all and end all of the selection process for colleges anymore.

[shooter808]

Don't see the point in bashing the OIA .They don't have an income stream from colleges looking for college-level talent.
The parents and kids get that income ,not the BIIF,OIA,ILH,MIL,or KIF. Some of the loudest complainers here about fairness and free markets don't get it....it;s you and your kids and the colleges....that is the money flow. The high school leagues your kids play in aren't involved in that monetary loop.

As another poster has said,camps and combines have become very important in football, clubs like AAU and Asics more important for volleyball,soccer,hoops , etc..High schools are not the be all and end all of the selection process for colleges anymore.

brah, just because I don't see things your way don't mean I don't get it. It is all about the kids and the options available to them.

[Martin]

Actually the rule is in effect now. If you transfer out now and when the new school asked if you played at a previous school last year, bam. Wonder how Millani and Leileihua connived a turf field before OIA perennials Kahuku? Oh and Roosevelt, a D2 school.

[twnoexcuses]

Don't see the point in bashing the OIA .They don't have an income stream from colleges looking for college-level talent.
The parents and kids get that income ,not the BIIF,OIA,ILH,MIL,or KIF. Some of the loudest complainers here about fairness and free markets don't get it....it;s you and your kids and the colleges....that is the money flow. The high school leagues your kids play in aren't involved in that monetary loop.

As another poster has said,camps and combines have become very important in football, clubs like AAU and Asics more important for volleyball,soccer,hoops , etc..High schools are not the be all and end all of the selection process for colleges anymore.

Here's my point in bashing the OIA (and DOE) for the new transfer rules:

OIA schools are PUBLIC schools. The State has chosen to make it a PRESUMPTION that if a kid LIVES in a certain geographical area, the kid goes to the school in that area. The State has further seen fit to establish a geographical exception procedure and process out of recognition that there are circumstances where a kid might not fit in his/her geographically assigned school.

Why are children being excluded from participating in school activities merely because of residential choices made by parents, or parents seeking to avail themselves of a long established exception process? Because a couple of teams lost star players and the jocks of the left behind district(s) are pissed?

I have yet to hear or read a single statement, rationale, or argument for how the transfer rule enhances education. I believe I have not seen such a statement, rationale, or argument because no credible one exists. To the extent the transfer rule acts as a deterrent from families seeking to transfer their child, it runs squarely afoul of the the principles that underly the GE rules, which take into account that a given school might not be the best for a kid, and the very geographical rules the State imposes on all public school students, in terms of requiring them to presumptively attend the school in the district where they live.

The transfer rule is simply a device to imprison stellar athletes within a district they may, by happenstance even, have lived in for some arbitrary time during their four years of high school.

Life is different. People move. Kids have all kinds of different needs and interests. IF ANYWHERE, the public school system should be accommodating of those realities, rather than punitive. The transfer rule is punitive. Without cause or justification. 'Cause the interests of overly competitive jocks or jealousy about greener pastures in a district should never be a reason to withhold access to educational activities.

[Martin]

Don't see the point in bashing the OIA .They don't have an income stream from colleges looking for college-level talent.
The parents and kids get that income ,not the BIIF,OIA,ILH,MIL,or KIF. Some of the loudest complainers here about fairness and free markets don't get it....it;s you and your kids and the colleges....that is the money flow. The high school leagues your kids play in aren't involved in that monetary loop.

As another poster has said,camps and combines have become very important in football, clubs like AAU and Asics more important for volleyball,soccer,hoops , etc..High schools are not the be all and end all of the selection process for colleges anymore.

Here's my point in bashing the OIA (and DOE) for the new transfer rules:

OIA schools are PUBLIC schools. The State has chosen to make it a PRESUMPTION that if a kid LIVES in a certain geographical area, the kid goes to the school in that area. The State has further seen fit to establish a geographical exception procedure and process out of recognition that there are circumstances where a kid might not fit in his/her geographically assigned school.

Why are children being excluded from participating in school activities merely because of residential choices made by parents, or parents seeking to avail themselves of a long established exception process? Because a couple of teams lost star players and the jocks of the left behind district(s) are pissed?

I have yet to hear or read a single statement, rationale, or argument for how the transfer rule enhances education. I believe I have not seen such a statement, rationale, or argument because no credible one exists. To the extent the transfer rule acts as a deterrent from families seeking to transfer their child, it runs squarely afoul of the the principles that underly the GE rules, which take into account that a given school might not be the best for a kid, and the very geographical rules the State imposes on all public school students, in terms of requiring them to presumptively attend the school in the district where they live.

The transfer rule is simply a device to imprison stellar athletes within a district they may, by happenstance even, have lived in for some arbitrary time during their four years of high school.

Life is different. People move. Kids have all kinds of different needs and interests. IF ANYWHERE, the public school system should be accommodating of those realities, rather than punitive. The transfer rule is punitive. Without cause or justification. 'Cause the interests of overly competitive jocks or jealousy about greener pastures in a district should never be a reason to withhold access to educational activities.

How much spots should the "excellent school" hold for outsider?

[gridiron22]

The transfer rule seems legit and should prevent wide spread abuse of athletes that cant make up their minds where they want to play and then at the last minute jump on a Mililani bandwagon, the parents need to be smarter with the dealings of their kids and they will be able to let the system work for them. The parents that are smart will not have a problem with this rule, its the ones that don't know how to read a document and plan accordingly that will complain like little babies.

[twnoexcuses]

Widespread? Proof please.

And even if a couple to few all-state tpes get caught in the net, and a couple schools can't be dominant with the missing pieces, WHAT ABOUT THE NON-ALL STATERS?

This rule applies across the board. To the 3rd string player on the football team, and the swimmer, and the non gifted athlete trying to just particupate.

The net cast to catch a couple to few all staters ends up killing off the reef.

And the sancionable conduct is (because it INCLUDES PRESUMPTIVELY) . . . "My parents needed to pay less rent.". Or, "my folks are divorced, and I want to spend time at my father's house.". Or, "my home district hs a weak math department, so I want to go where the math is stronger.". Or, "Mom and Dad have problems. It's better if.me and my 5 year old sister live across the island with grandma and grandpa.". Or, "I want to do theater (or robotics, or water polo).". Or, . . .(think up just about anything in the wide, wide world of reasons kids end up living where they live).

List a legitimate residence in the district on a public school registration form, and the kid can attend. No problem. List a legitimate residence in the district, but the kid played a sport the prior year, and the kid has.to hire a lawyer to play that year. Something's wrong with that.

The transfer rule seems legit and should prevent wide spread abuse of athletes that cant make up their minds where they want to play and then at the last minute jump on a Mililani bandwagon, the parents need to be smarter with the dealings of their kids and they will be able to let the system work for them. The parents that are smart will not have a problem with this rule, its the ones that don't know how to read a document and plan accordingly that will complain like little babies.

[wrestling808]

Widespread? Proof please.

And even if a couple to few all-state tpes get caught in the net, and a couple schools can't be dominant with the missing pieces, WHAT ABOUT THE NON-ALL STATERS?

This rule applies across the board. To the 3rd string player on the football team, and the swimmer, and the non gifted athlete trying to just particupate.

The net cast to catch a couple to few all staters ends up killing off the reef.

And the sancionable conduct is (because it INCLUDES PRESUMPTIVELY) . . . "My parents needed to pay less rent.". Or, "my folks are divorced, and I want to spend time at my father's house.". Or, "my home district hs a weak math department, so I want to go where the math is stronger.". Or, "Mom and Dad have problems. It's better if.me and my 5 year old sister live across the island with grandma and grandpa.". Or, "I want to do theater (or robotics, or water polo).". Or, . . .(think up just about anything in the wide, wide world of reasons kids end up living where they live).

List a legitimate residence in the district on a public school registration form, and the kid can attend. No problem. List a legitimate residence in the district, but the kid played a sport the prior year, and the kid has.to hire a lawyer to play that year. Something's wrong with that.

The transfer rule seems legit and should prevent wide spread abuse of athletes that cant make up their minds where they want to play and then at the last minute jump on a Mililani bandwagon, the parents need to be smarter with the dealings of their kids and they will be able to let the system work for them. The parents that are smart will not have a problem with this rule, its the ones that don't know how to read a document and plan accordingly that will complain like little babies.

When the student transfer gets to the "Now I need to hire a lawyer" part, have the attorney send the bill to Kale Ane, Rod York and of course Rich Miano. Rich can have EK Fernandez do a carnival to raise money for the athletes legal fund. York and Ane can be part of dunk tank attraction. I'm sure they'll bring in a ton of cash.

[Defend_Yourself_808]

This island/state is so puny who cares where they live. The fact of the matter is this, these kids are representing hawaii period. So what if they from waianae and they playing at kapolei, or kam to kahuku, kalihi to mililani or freakin Niihau to big island. Who cares, bottom line is this they all represent one thing in common when moving up to the next level. Our home, our district as one the great 808 state hawaii. That's the only thing we should be worried about is having our kids play the game and make noise to dem scouts all over the country. School pride is one thing/ but having the 808 love & support life after high school is a whole different beast.

[unpaid]

twonoexcuses and shooter808,

You are both passionate about your viewpoints,but I think you are both misled about OIA intentions on transfers.As a parent you and your kids are involved in the money flow that accrues from having an athletically talented kid who can be recruited on scholarship to play sports and get their college education paid for. Not so for the OIA,Hawaii DOE,or similar leagues and DOE's in any other state in the USA.These entities get no money from colleges to induce high schools to specifically produce more student-athletes.

Public school educators are really only tasked with educating kids to make them productive members of our society. The bottom line for educators is to insure kids can pass the graduation requirements to get a high school diploma.The beginning of no child left behind are the clue to the academic mindset. Public schools would like all kids to succeed.They , and probably you too,think all kids should have the same chance to succeed in life. But..no one can be left behind....so sometimes, these educators try to level the field,academically,and athletically as well. The kids are not chattel..they are young human beings who should all succeed. So,sure,they might view transfer rules as a way to level the playing field...so that all kids have a chance to succeed .It is just the mindset. .....doesn't make DOE educators the same as plantation owners....they think they are doing what is right for all kids....pretty much the same reason you two guys think you are espousing what is right for all kids.

[twnoexcuses]

unpaid,

I have no idea what dots you're trying to connect in your first paragraph, nor the pat of the lines if there is any connection at all.

The final conclusion in your second paragraph is about as wrong as it could be. Especially when you correctly first acknowledge that kids are not "chattel" (making me wonder if youreally believe that statement).

Rules designed to punish people for simply leaving an area, particularly to protect and ensure the availability for performance on (or, more to my analogy, "in") the field, is about as antebellum plantation south a mentality and technique as there could be. Restraint and punishment of human beings, and, as is the DOE's way, punishment of children for decisions of their parents. Worse, to serve the interests of having a better fottball team.

Talking about the transfer rule as one designed to address educational imperatives and obligations is an absolute joke and smokescreen. There is no educational benefit to abitrarily denying access to sports.

For reasons related to classroom performance? Or behavior? Definitely.

But not for simply moving house, and not, as the case tends to be, to seek access to excellence.

I agree the DOE is trying to "level the playing field.". But not to improve education or motivate better performannce. Plainly and clearly, it is a move to ensure an undesirable sports program has punitive tools to keep a good player on a team, and in a program, and at a school that he or she or his or her parents simply do not want the stdent to play for, and to punish them for attempting to do so, with the deterrent stick being NOT being able to do so. So, to that end, the transfer rule, in addition to being the "massas" holding onto the plantation workers, ensures that mediocrity or worse can still continue. Cuz options to flee are limited or there is punishment waiting at the other end.

Please, do not try to put lipstick on this trasfer rule pig by attempting to argue there was ANY "educational" thought put into it. It is about as bad an indicator of DOE attittude, sense of mission, and regard for the people they are supposed to serve as there could possibly be.

twonoexcuses and shooter808,

You are both passionate about your viewpoints,but I think you are both misled about OIA intentions on transfers.As a parent you and your kids are involved in the money flow that accrues from having an athletically talented kid who can be recruited on scholarship to play sports and get their college education paid for. Not so for the OIA,Hawaii DOE,or similar leagues and DOE's in any other state in the USA.These entities get no money from colleges to induce high schools to specifically produce more student-athletes.

Public school educators are really only tasked with educating kids to make them productive members of our society. The bottom line for educators is to insure kids can pass the graduation requirements to get a high school diploma.The beginning of no child left behind are the clue to the academic mindset. Public schools would like all kids to succeed.They , and probably you too,think all kids should have the same chance to succeed in life. But..no one can be left behind....so sometimes, these educators try to level the field,academically,and athletically as well. The kids are not chattel..they are young human beings who should all succeed. So,sure,they might view transfer rules as a way to level the playing field...so that all kids have a chance to succeed .It is just the mindset. .....doesn't make DOE educators the same as plantation owners....they think they are doing what is right for all kids....pretty much the same reason you two guys think you are espousing what is right for all kids.

[unpaid]

It takes a rare man to admit he can not connect the dots.

[twnoexcuses]

It takes a rare man to admit he can not connect the dots.

An even rarer one who tries to construct an "education" argument for the transfer rule by suggesting it's because.colleges aren't paying DOE personnel not to enact or enforce it.

[unpaid]

Still having problems connecting the dots I see...well,that's not all that important. The dots all lead to the point. And the point of my argument is that the OIA is trying to level the playing field so all kids can succeed.They have to get kids a diploma.
Athletics are co-curricular,but DOE and OIA are one and the same ,they are educators and they have that no child left behind mindset. I never see them letting go of transfer rules because they view the rich getting richer as an unfair advantage. It's the same reason they ended geographical divisions in football. Kahuku was always winning the East followed by Farrington. The OIA West was getting to be like the SEC West where everybody was beating up on each other....So , they took all the odd no finishers from both divisions and made them play each other this year....and they took all the even no finishers and made them play each other this year.Then they are going to mix it up again in two years. Does it make any difference...maybe not.after all who wound up getting the three OIA playoff spots this year...right,Mililani,Kahuku,and Farrington.

The OIA is always going to have transfer rules...it's in their DNA as Hawaii educators....so live with it.

The really only true hope you have to see transfer rules abolished is if Hawaii gets to the point where the CIF Southern Section got to last year in the Los Angeles Orange county area. The paperwork over the years got to the point where even the CIF administration said this is too much red tape even for us bureaucrats. There is no sit-out period for athletic transfers in SoCal now.

Thing is, SoCal has four times the population of Hawaii. We are still a small state. The powers that be are not going to be stretched beyond their capabilities to try to produce outcomes on the athletic field just yet.

[Tmanz]

Actually the rule is in effect now. If you transfer out now and when the new school asked if you played at a previous school last year, bam. Wonder how Millani and Leileihua connived a turf field before OIA perennials Kahuku? Oh and Roosevelt, a D2 school.

Roosevelt was in need of turf, they currently house 3 teams (themselves, Farrington & McKinley