The Languages of Sports
August 6, 2013
Our state is enriched by the cultural diversity which has resulted from decades of families relocating from other countries to Michigan for the opportunities available here.
Often the children in these families are conversant in English, but their parents are less so. This is why, for example, the Refugee Development Center in Lansing not only provides ESL classes for students but also for parents; and why the RDC provides interpreters to accompany parents to school events such as parent-teacher conferences. The RDC currently serves refugees from 28 different countries.
Becoming increasingly sensitized to these dynamics, the MHSAA has recently begun a long process of providing certain of its documents in other languages than English. We’re going to focus on those documents that we provide to schools which parents would want to read to learn about what is being described to or required of their children with respect to interscholastic athletic participation.
The first such documents are the two-page and four-page preparticipation physical examination forms. And the first languages chosen for the service are Spanish, which is the most common non-English language spoken in the United States, and Arabic, which acknowledges that Michigan is home to the largest Arabic-speaking population in the US.
You will find these documents here.
The Rules We Use
February 9, 2016
The MHSAA Handbook of 90 years ago consisted of merely 21 pages, a diminutive 3½ x 6 inches in size.
The proposals for just the changes in the Handbook for 2016-17 require almost as many words as the entire Handbook of 1925-26.
The Handbook has grown to 130 full-sized, 8½ x 11-inch pages not just because we serve more sports and students than 90 years ago. It also grows because life is much more complicated. Society, schools and sports have much broader concerns today.
Every policy described in the current Handbook got there as a response to people wanting more rules or recommendations – sometimes to treat students better and other times to promote competitive equity, both of which are worthy objectives and should continue to be the rationale for proposals.
Occasionally I hear my colleagues in other states say we need to modernize our rules, to be sure we are not trying to apply 20th century rules to 21st century problems. I don’t disagree with that populist refrain.
However, before any rule is removed, those in charge must ask and answer: “How will school sports look without this rule? Will the problem this rule was created to solve return if we remove the rule? Will doing so create even worse problems?”
Rarely has the adoption of a new rule by our organization been a mistake. I cannot say the same for the removal of rules.