Calling for a Common Sense Calendar
September 3, 2013
Finally today, at long last, all the schools of Michigan may legally allow their students to return to their classrooms.
For months, almost every day, I have driven twice daily past a sign in front of a public school proclaiming, “Have a Safe Summer! See you September 3rd.” Almost every drive-by made my blood boil. What a waste of facilities. What a waste of brains!
For all of the bluster about new color-coded grading systems for schools and common core curriculum and countywide consolidation of districts’ support services, Michigan’s children continue to suffer from backward thinking on the most basic matter: the calendar.
As long as public schools are penalized if they start classes days or weeks earlier than today – when their private school competition begins – public schools will be unfairly handicapped in appealing to parents, and public school students will be at a distinct disadvantage in learning.
Michigan’s regressive law that penalizes public schools for demanding earlier or longer academic school days and years is worse than merely being contrary to common sense; it’s in opposition to the best interests of our children. Most of them are more than ready for school by mid to late August, and many of them really needed to be in school long before today.
Sweating the Small Stuff - #3
June 5, 2018
I’m sure it discouraged some of our state’s high school football coaches to learn that the Representative Council of the Michigan High School Athletic Association did not approve at its May 6-7 meeting what some people refer to as the “enhanced strength of schedule proposal” for determining 256 qualifiers to the MHSAA’s 11-player football playoffs.
There was desire among some Council members to appease those who keep trying to reduce the difficulties that a football tournament causes for regular season scheduling and conference affiliations. Others noted that the proposal, as presented, could cause as much harm to some schools and conferences as it would help others, that it did not solve the scheduling problem but shifted it.
During spirited discussion, some Council members resurrected two ideas that have been rejected previously, such as (1) doubling the playoffs once again (and shortening the regular season to eight games), and (2) coupling a six- or seven-win minimum with the revised strength of schedule criteria. The pros and cons of each idea flowed freely.
And therein is the problem. If one digs down into the details of proposals, both old and new, there are both positive and negative aspects apparent, both intended and unintended consequences likely.
There can be paralysis in analysis; but when we are dealing with more than 600 high school programs and a physically demanding sport with fewer regular-season contests permitted than in any other sport, one cannot be too careful. Eliminating one of just nine regular-season games? Increasing first-round tournament mismatches? Disadvantaging larger schools locked in leagues or areas of the state where smaller schools predominate? These are not minor matters.
And until there are sensible answers, these are not trivial questions.