Logo

Anytime, Anywhere

July 28, 2014

The MHSAA’s Coaches Advancement Program (CAP) is like no other high school level coaches education program in the US.
In an online world, including many other ways here at the MHSAA, CAP still trades purposefully in face-to-face learning; and the MHSAA Is committed to delivering sessions “anytime, anywhere” – any time a school, district, league or coaches association will sign up 20 coaches, the MHSAA will deliver one or more of the six CAP levels the group requests.
About 60 percent of those who complete CAP Levels 1 through 5 do so as a part of their course work at one of seven colleges or universities in Michigan (Central Michigan University, Kalamazoo Valley Community College, Lake Michigan Community College, Muskegon Community College, Northern Michigan University, Oakland County Community College and Western Michigan University).
The other 40 percent of those who complete CAP – and this will be a growing percentage – do so through sessions facilitated by a group of people who have committed many evenings and weekends to CAP’s “anytime, anywhere” approach to ongoing, adult education. During 2013-14, Jerry Haggerty, athletic director at Hamilton High School, led all presenters, teaching 25 sessions. Among other of the busiest presenters were Tony Moreno of Eastern Michigan University; retired athletic administrator Jim Feldkamp; Ken Mohney, athletic director at Mattawan; and Hally Yonko, athletic director at Ann Arbor-Gabriel Richard High School.
The leader of boundless energy and enthusiasm for CAP is MHSAA Assistant Director Kathy Vruggink Westdorp. In 2016-17, CAP Level 1 or 2 becomes a requirement for all persons hired for the first time at any MHSAA member school after July 31, 2016 as a high school varsity head coach. Kathy and a growing cadre of presenters are eagerly awaiting that challenge.
The team closed the 2013-14 school year by presenting eight levels of CAP at six different sites over six days, June 9-14, and then conducted CAP Levels 1, 2 and 3 on three consecutive days, June 19-21, at Clinton High School.

Transfers

January 10, 2017

When it comes to transfers, the staff of the Michigan High School Athletic Association gets lots of advice, but it comes from opposing directions.

One camp thinks MHSAA rules are inadequate. This group suggests that we expand the basic period of ineligibility from approximately 90 days to 180 days and/or it wants the MHSAA to eliminate most or all exceptions that allow for immediate eligibility of a transfer student.

This first camp is so frustrated with high-profile athletic-motivated or related transfers that they want to clamp down on all transfers.

The other camp thinks parents have the right and responsibility to send their children to any school they wish and have immediate access to the full benefits of that school’s curricular and extracurricular offerings.

This second camp is encouraged by the laws of Michigan which have gradually extended “schools of choice” as an option that all school districts may exercise. And this camp will be emboldened if the Secretary of Education under the new regime in Washington, D.C. is the long-time schools of choice advocate who has been nominated by the President-Elect for this position.

This second camp is on the right side of history, no matter how much I dislike it and no matter how convinced I am that the better way to have improved public education would have been to invest more in neighborhood schools. Improving them builds most communities. Ignoring them, as we have for 25 years, sends surrounding communities into downward spirals that worsen poverty and public health.

The ill-advised efforts to improve education by enticing students out of their neighborhoods to attend schools elsewhere has undermined “local ownership” in schools; and it has had the side effect of encouraging more transfers motivated by or related to athletics. Monitoring and managing such transfers is made more difficult by these educational reforms; but the new world will not tolerate transfer rules that are seen as too broad and contrary to what has become public policy, however poorly conceived and executed.

The fact is, the future of the transfer rule will be less about extending its reach and more about retaining its existence.