Bad Choice
September 11, 2015
From our vantage point, we saw years ago that “choice” was disrupting schools more than it was improving them, and hindering more than enhancing the academic accomplishments of students.
What we saw years ago was that choice was more often exercised for adults’ convenience – to schools closer to child care or parents’ jobs – than for students’ academic improvement. Studies now tend to prove that observation is correct.
We also saw years ago that choice was mostly a chain reaction of prickly people. Students or their parents unhappy with their local school for one reason or another would move to a nearby school where, simultaneously, unhappy people would be moving from there to another nearby school. Studies now show that about half of choice students return to where they began; whether or not they ever accept that the fault was their own and not the fault of the first school is more difficult to discern.
In July, Michigan State University reported some of the most recent research about, and some of the faintest praise for, school of choice; but because previous studies have demonstrated that students’ learning diminishes as their mobility increases, there should have been much more scrutiny of Michigan’s school of choice policy when it was introduced 20 years ago, and as it has spread to 80 percent of Michigan school districts since 1994.
As a means of improving schools, choice has failed by making poor schools worse. As a means of integrating schools, choice and charter schools have actually re-segregated schools. And as a means of destroying neighborhoods, choice has been the perfect weapon.
You want to rebuild Michigan? Then start with neighborhoods, at the center of which will be a grocery store and a school, both within walking distance for their patrons who are invested in them.
School of choice has created problems for administrators of school sports. But what’s far worse is the damage it has done and continues to do to our students, schools and society.
Exploring Esports
May 18, 2018
One of the liveliest topics of discussion during the May 6-7 meetings of the Representative Council of the Michigan High School Athletic Association was “esports.”
Some Council members, sensing an opportunity to connect with additional students, are intrigued; and they wonder how long we can dissect the topic before the train leaves the station without our involvement and influence.
Other Council members, seeing the violent nature of many of the popular games and the lack of physical activity by participants, question what authentic place electronic gaming could ever have in educational athletics.
Where money drives the enterprise, there has been little hesitation to become involved. Most professional sports leagues and/or franchises are already heavily invested. The only value judgment being made is the return on investment dollars.
Intercollegiate athletics is not far behind. The National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) sponsors events. The NCAA has a powerful work group developing strategies. More than 100 colleges are providing scholarships, including Michigan institutions.
At least a half-dozen of our counterpart organizations across the US will conduct or endorse esports seasons and tournaments for high schools during 2018-19. The MHSAA has organizations both within and outside Michigan looking for our leadership.
The industry has lots of hype and cash behind it. But before it will be educators who will question how shoot-and-kill games have a place in schools.
There may be many beneficial outcomes for participating students: e.g., improved hand-eye coordination, problem-solving skills, concentration, multi-tasking, memory – even team-building skills. There also may be negative outcomes, including too much of what might be a good thing, leading to insomnia and addiction.
PlayVS, an esport upstart company aiming at the high school level, promotes esports with the slogan, “It’s not a sport; it’s our sport.”
Arthur Piccolo, CEO of New Sports Group in New York, counters, “So-called esports is not a sport, it is computer game playing.”
I delight in the debate because it is rare that something comes along that so quickly drives discussion to defining issues of school-based sports ... to searching for the sweet spot that expands student engagement without abandoning what makes school sports a force for good in students, schools and society.