Logo

Skills We Value

May 19, 2013

Evelyn Evans was a National Endowment of Humanities participant at The Henry Ford in 2009 and an early adopter of The Henry Ford Innovation Education Incubator pilot project in 2012 (click here). 

Here’s some of what she has to say in that organization’s very fine January-May 2013 publication:

“As educators, we face decisions daily.  Our job is a simple one:  teach our students the content curriculum, 21st-century skills, social skills, critical thinking, research skills, test-taking skills, responsible citizenship, stewardship, morals, ethics and everything else . . .

“What skills do I value?  Risk-taking, problem-solving, critical thinking and perseverance.  What do I want my curriculum to do for students?  Motivate.  Excite.  Stretch.  Encourage.  To let them know that it’s OK to take a risk.  It’ is also OK to fail, because failure is a learning experience and can be a stepping-stone to a greater idea.”

It is difficult for me to think of any part of our schools that provide these lessons and nurture these skills any more efficiently than extracurricular sports and activities.

Stacking

December 19, 2014

Many in the interscholastic tennis community of this state have complained for years about the unethical practices of a small number of coaches who “stack” their lineups so that their better players compete in lower flights to increase their chances of success in advancing and earning points for their teams.
The current meet scoring system, which fails to reward teams for placing players at the highest levels, invites the problem. Appealing to personal integrity works with most coaches, but not all; so the issue of stacking festers, and it frustrates many coaches.
Hearing this pain, in 2009 the MHSAA convened a group of tennis coaches to discuss stacking. We utilized a paid professional facilitator. One obvious outcome was very little support to solve the problem by restructuring the tennis meet scoring system to disincentivize stacking.
The simple solution – to modify the meet scoring system to provide more team points for Number 1 singles than Number 2, and for Number 2 more than Number 3, etc. – was a double fault with the clear majority of the coaches assembled in 2009.
Of course, simple solutions rarely are so simple. And with this scoring system solution comes the likelihood that stronger teams move even further out of reach of their challengers. Other critics are uncomfortable with giving one student-athlete a higher potential team point value than another.
If those and other objections are the prevailing sentiment, then a new scoring system won’t be in our future. And stacking still will be.