Schools Continue to Manage the Heat
July 16, 2015
By Rob Kaminski
MHSAA benchmarks editor
It certainly was not the MHSAA’s intent to spur the most historically frigid back-to-back winters the state has seen. Nor did the Association wish for one of the mildest summers in recent memory during 2014.
Seemingly, it’s just Mother Nature’s way of reading into MHSAA efforts for managing heat and humidity and acclimatizing student-athletes for warm-weather activities.
Since guidelines were put in place (recommended for regular-season sessions and required for postseason tournaments) before the 2013-14 school year, there have been relatively few days during which psychrometers have had to be implemented.
“The key is, we’ve got plans in place for when the climate returns to normal trends for return-to-school practices and contests in August and September, as well as early June events,” said MHSAA Executive Director Jack Roberts. “It is a bit ironic that there have been relatively few days since the guidelines were established that they’ve actually come into play.”
In a nutshell, the guidelines provide instruction for four ranges of heat index: below 95 degrees; 95-99 degrees; 99-104 degrees, and heat indexes above 104 degrees, with increasing precautions in place as heat indexes rise. An index above 104 calls for all activity to cease.
Certified athletic trainers Gretchen Mohney and James Lioy agree that recent requirements in heat and hydration guidelines are a step in the right direction and encourage that – when possible – an athletic trainer oversee the implementation. Simply taking a reading from just outside the AD’s office or at home does not simulate on-site conditions.
“This doesn’t take into account the radiant heat at the site, which can drastically affect the conditions that athlete plays in. It is essential that all parties involved in making decisions to play collaborate with one another,” Mohney said.
Heat-related deaths in athletics rank only behind cardiac disorders and head and neck injuries, but such fatalities might lead the way in frustration for families and communities of the victims. The reason? Heat-related illness is totally preventable.
Another source of mild frustration is the lack of recording within the state for those practice and game situations which warrant heat protocols.
When the Representative Council was formulating the Heat and Humidity Policy, it was also mindful of ways in which the MHSAA could assist schools in putting the plan into practice. Coaches, athletic directors and trainers needed a method to record information for athletic directors to view and for the MHSAA to track. The MHSAA developed interactive web pages on MHSAA.com which allow registered personnel to record weather conditions as practices and contests are taking place, using psychrometers.
Additionally, discounted Heat and Humidity Monitors and Precision Heat Index Instruments are offered to schools through a partnership between the MHSAA and School Health.
Yet, since the availability of such tools came to fruition two years back, fewer than 1,000 entries have been recorded, and many are multiple entries from the same schools.
Of the 772 entries, only 15 took place when the heat index was in excess of 104, while just 21 indicated an index of greater than 100. Cooler temperatures could be playing a factor in the overall number of participation, particularly in the northern areas of the state.
Nearly all of the responses came during fall practices, with a few isolated cases coming during the spring.
As Mohney pointed out, all resources must be properly used in concert with one another to achieve desired results.
Reminders of the tools available to schools are disseminated throughout the state each summer.
Working Through Transfer Trends
December 2, 2015
By Jack Roberts
MHSAA Executive Director
One of the responsibilities that schools have asked organizations like the MHSAA to execute is the management of transfer student eligibility. Historically, many associations have linked eligibility to residence ... thus, for some the regulation has been called the “Residency Rule” or “Transfer/Residency Rule,” not merely the “Transfer Rule.”
Over the years, as society became more mobile and families less stable, these rules became more and more complicated; and now, for most state high school associations, this is the regulation that consumes the most (or second) most pages of their handbooks. Over the years, this has also been the regulation most frequently challenged in court.
Over the years, some states have relaxed their transfer rule and others have refined their transfer rule. In either case, the transfer rule remains an imperfect rule, an imperfect net. Sometimes this net snags students who should not be made ineligible, and for those situations all associations have arranged some kind of waiver or appeal process.
And sometimes, and much less easily solved, the net fails to catch the situations it really should ... the transfers that are not hardship related or the result of some very compelling educational need, but those that are obviously for athletic reasons. It is those that we have been most focused on in Michigan.
Our first effort to get at the most problematic transfers was the adoption for the 1997-98 school year of what we called the “Athletic-MOTIVATED Transfer Rule” ... Regulation I, Section 9(E). Examples of an athletic-motivated transfer are included in the rule. The rule only applies to transfer students who do NOT meet any of the stated exceptions for immediate eligibility and are ineligible for one semester under our basic transfer rule. They become ineligible for 180 scheduled school days if there is a finding that the transfer was more for athletics than any other compelling reason.
This effort has not been successful enough because it requires a school that loses a student to another school to promptly allege to the MHSAA office, with supporting documentation, that the transfer was more for athletic reasons than any other compelling reason. The receiving school then must respond to those allegations. Then the executive director makes the decision. The unfortunate result of applying this rule is that it usually causes hard feelings between the schools, and hard feelings toward the executive director by the school decided against. In 17 years, schools have invoked this rule only 45 times.
Our more recent effort to address the most egregious athletic transfers resulted from requests from the coaches associations for wrestling and basketball, which were watching too many students change schools for athletic reasons, usually related to an out-of-season coaching relationship. The new rule – the “Athletic-RELATED Transfer Rule” – is Regulation I, Section 9(F). The difference between Section 9(E) and the newer Section 9(F) is that in 9(F) one school does not have to make and document allegations before staff can act. If MHSAA staff discover or are informed of any of the circumstances listed in 9(F), we can act. Again, the rule only applies to those transfer students whose circumstances do NOT meet one of the automatic exceptions. It applies only to students who are ineligible for a semester under the basic transfer rule. If there is a finding that one of the athletic related “links” exists (usually an out-of-season coaching relationship), then this transfer student who would be ineligible for one semester is made ineligible for 180 scheduled school days.
So far, it appears that 9(F) may be a better deterrent than 9(E). It has been referenced when students are rumored to be transferring, and it has stopped many of those transfers before they occur. We expect 9(F) to be an even better deterrent in 2015-16 because the rule has been broadened to apply to administrators and parents (not just coaches) and to address directing and coordinating athletic activities (not just coaching).
We have said that if this latest effort does not succeed in slowing athletic transfers, then the next step is 180 days of ineligibility – at least in any sport the student played in high school previously – for all transfer students who do not qualify for an exception that permits immediate play. I fear that would catch far too many students who should not be withheld so long from competition and could lead to a period like the early 1980s when the MHSAA, at the request of the state principals association, adopted the core of the transfer rule we have today and which resulted in a period of busiest litigation for the MHSAA when, at one time, the association had more than a dozen cases in court simultaneously on transfer matters. We’ve got to make the current rules work – with tweaks, perhaps; but not with radical revision.