Logo

The Student Effect

January 7, 2014

The key to assuring an activity is educational is to consider the effect on the student of every decision made. For example, what is the effect on a student who ...

  • gets cut from the team?
  • never gets in a game?
  • never experiences a win, or never a loss?
  • frequently hears vulgarity or profanity?
  • is taught how not to get caught breaking a rule?

If one student’s participation is at the expense of another student’s self-esteem, whether opponent or teammate, we can’t justify the program. It’s not consistent with the educational mission of schools.

If we ridicule those who fail, or if we lavish too much praise on those who achieve, we can’t justify the program. It’s not educational athletics.

If we direct or pressure students to specialize in only athletics or non-athletic activities, or in just one sport or activity, we can’t justify the program. It’s not educational.

If we miss or misuse the teachable moments of school sports – split seconds of time and circumstance in which to teach values like commitment, discipline, integrity, hard work and teamwork, we can’t justify the program. It’s not educational.

We assure the program is educational when we consider the effect on the student and when we seize the positive purposes of teachable moments that permeate the program.

None of this means we can’t have rules that, when violated, remove the privilege of participation. And none of this means we cannot have teams with both starters and substitutes, and contests that determine wins and losses. It means that there are objectives that go much deeper and outcomes that go much further.

Unjustified

December 11, 2015

The MHSAA has taken some unjustified criticism about the last-minute cancellation or relocation of several boys basketball games scheduled for the University of Detroit-Mercy earlier this week.

Unjustified because we would have liked the event to have been successful for our schools involved and a venue (Calihan Hall) we use often for MHSAA events.

Unjustified because the failure to follow interstate sanctioning rules was not our fault.

Unjustified because those who were in charge failed to respond to several outreaches well in advance of the event that were intended to inform or remind the organizers to seek and obtain proper approvals.

Unjustified because those approvals are a required part of the sanctioning policies and procedures of the national organization to which we belong, and which applied as much to the out-of-state schools as to our own.

Unjustified because critics now blame the problem on travel distance restrictions, which was not the issue at all. The travel was well within the generous limitations that exist.

What was at issue was the requirement that interstate events that are sponsored or co-sponsored by entities other than member schools must have the prior approval of each of the state high school associations involved, as well as the approval of the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS). This flows from the original purpose of the NFHS which was to bring accountability to interstate events at the high school level operated by colleges and commercial organizations.

We expect our schools to follow established rules of their state association, and we try to model that expectation by following the rules that apply to the MHSAA within its national organization.