And the MHSAA Survey Says ...

April 2, 2015

By Rob Kaminski
MHSAA benchmarks editor

A survey of MHSAA member schools was conducted in the fall of 2014 aimed to determine opinions for and against a myriad of out-of-season coaching/contact period topics within the school year.

Below are some of the summaries drawn from that survey, plus a map of zones referred to in a number of points.

Survey Summary and Highlights

The larger the school, the higher the percentage of students who are involved in organized non-school sports.

The Detroit metro area (Zone 3) has the highest percentage of respondents in each of two groups in which the highest percentage of students are involved in organized non-school sports ... the 60 to 80% and 40 to 60% groups. The Grand Rapids area (Zone 6) ranks second.

The northern Lower Peninsula (Zone 7) and the Upper Peninsula (Zone 8) have the highest percentage of respondents in the group in which the lowest percentage of students are involved in organized non-school sports . . . the 0 to 20% group. This is also true of Zones 1, 2 and 5, although less dramatically.

In the majority of schools, coaches work with students out of season under the three- or four-player rule for a few weeks just before the season. This is generally true regardless of school classification or geographic zone.

In nearly 80% of schools, the frequency of coaches working with students out of season under the three- or four-player rule is one or two days a week.

100% of schools that sponsor basketball hold open gyms for basketball. Two-thirds of volleyball schools hold volleyball open gyms. Half of lacrosse schools hold lacrosse open gyms. Open gyms in baseball, softball and soccer occur in 40 to 45% of responding schools. Open gyms are less common for other sports.

More than half of all schools conduct open gyms for only a few weeks, just before the season begins.

In 85% of schools, the frequency of open gyms is one or two days a week.

The multi-sport athlete is common in schools of every classification, but more common in Class C and D schools than in Class A and B.

The multi-sport athlete is common in schools of every geographical zone, but more common in Zones 1, 2, 4, 7 and 8 than in Zones 3, 5 and 6.

Two-thirds of schools do not ban athletes from out-of-season workouts while in-season in a different school sport. Permitting weightlifting is most common (84%), then three- or four-player workouts (70%), then conditioning (66%) and open gyms (65%), and finally non-school competitions (57%).

Single-sport coaches are more common in smaller schools than larger (perhaps because fewer sports are sponsored in smaller schools).

For one question, schools were asked to rate ideas from 1 (I like the concept) to 6 (I do not like the concept). Average would be 3.5.

More than 60% of schools favor a no-contact period for all out-of-season sports at the start of every other sport’s season. (Support ranges from 55% for Class A schools to 65% for Class D schools and from 56% for Zones 1 and 3 to 71% for Zone 7.)

More than 72% of schools favor (in conjunction with a no-contact period) a defined contact period out of season. Support ranges from 69% for Class B schools to 76% for Class D schools and from 64% in Zone 6 to 88% in Zone 1.

Two-thirds of schools favor setting a limit on the number of contact days for out-of-season coaching. Support ranges from 63% for Class A schools to 72% for Class C schools and from 50% for Zone 2 to 73% for Zone 1.

More than 68% of schools favor setting a limit on the number of contact days in a week. There’s almost no difference based on school class. Support ranges from 58% in Zone 6 to 76% in Zone 5.

Counting days more than players – that is, allowing practice with any number of students for a defined number of days over a period of time – is favored by more than 72% of schools. Support ranges from 69% for Class D to 76% for Class A and from 59% for Zone 5 to 76.5% for Zone 3.

The least support of any idea surveyed was for allowing scrimmage competition (allowing the coach to coach any number of students from that coach’s school in competition against individuals not enrolled in that school).

More than 62% of schools favor a rule that would allow a school coach to coach a non-school team within a defined contact period; that is, a team with students from the coach’s school (and possibly other schools too), but not supported with school funds, administration, insurance, uniforms, etc. Support ranged from 58% for Class C schools to 68% for Class B schools. Support ranged from 54% for Zone 2 to 69% for Zone 6.

This is the most popular proposal (doesn’t preclude others being approved too): 84% of schools favor removing the phrase “under one roof” from Regulation II, Section 11(H) 2 a (see Tuesday's report). Support ranged from 80% for Class D schools to 86% for Class C schools and from 78% in Zone 2 to 89% for Zone 5.

Removing the portion of Interpretation 237 which prohibits setting up rotations that would allow a coach to work with dozens of players who rotate to his/her direct attention in groups of three or four is favored by 69% of schools, but with a distinct large school vs. small school difference of opinion: Class A (80.5% favorable), Class B (72.9%), Class C (61.3%) and Class D (61.7%).

4 Thrusts: In Motion, On Track in 2013-14

December 20, 2013

By Jack Roberts
MHSAA Executive Director 

During the fall of 2012 at Update meetings across Michigan, we described “Four Thrusts for Four Years” – four health and safety emphases that would help us keep student-athletes healthier and also get a seat for Michigan’s policies and procedures for school sports on the train of best practices – an express train that is moving faster than we've ever seen it toward more cautious practice and play policies and more educational requirements for coaches.

At this December’s meeting, the MHSAA Representative Council examined a first quarter report card – what’s been accomplished during the first year.

It has been a remarkably strong start, but it’s only a start.

The first thrust, improving management of heat and humidity, received a boost last March when the Representative Council adopted a “Model Policy for Managing Heat and Humidity.” It has been promoted in print, online and at face-to-face meetings; and the response of schools has been nothing short of outstanding. 

This rapid acceptance by school administrators and coaches reflects their appreciation for a clear policy that identifies the precise conditions that call for adjustments in activities, and lists specific actions to be taken when temperature and humidity combine to reach un-safe levels. Gut and guesswork are gone.

The second thrust, raising expectations for coaches’ preparedness, is being advanced in three ways.

In May, the Representative Council adopted the requirement that by the 2014-15 school year, schools must attest that, prior to established deadlines, all assistant and subvarsity coaches at the high school level have completed annually the same MHSAA rules meeting required by all varsity head coaches or, in the alternative, one of the free online sports safety courses posted on or linked to MHSAA.com and designated to fulfill this requirement. This popular change is only the first component of this critically important second thrust.

The second component is this. The Representative Council voted in December to require by 2015-16 that MHSAA member high schools certify that all of their varsity head coaches of high school teams have a valid (current) CPR certification, with AED training as a recommended component.

As this requirement was discussed at constituent meetings, the question was frequently raised: “Why just head coaches?”

“Why indeed,” is our response. If a school has the will and resources, it most certainly should make CPR a requirement of all its coaches, as some school districts have required for many years.

CPR training is conveniently available near almost every MHSAA member school in Michigan. Still, the MHSAA will begin offering CPR certification (with AED training) on an optional basis as an extension of Level 1 of the Coaches Advancement Program (CAP) during 2014-15.

The third component of this thrust is scheduled to go before the Representative Council in March. The proposal is that all individuals hired for the first time as a varsity head coach of a high school team, to begin those coaching duties after July 31, 2016, must have completed the Coaches Advancement Program (CAP) Level 1 or 2.

The MHSAA will track compliance and prohibit varsity head coaches from attending their teams’ MHSAA tournament contests if they fail to complete this requirement, beginning in the 2016-17 school year.

In cases of very late hiring, schools may substitute two online courses of the National Federation of State High School Associations – “Fundamentals of Coaching” and “First Aid, Health and Safety.” However, that coach must complete CAP Level 1 or 2 within six months of the hiring date.

These feel like big steps to some people in MHSAA member schools – “too expensive” or “another obstacle to finding qualified coaches,” some say; but these are baby steps. 

This barely keeps pace with national trends. Michigan’s tradition of local control and its distaste for unfunded mandates has kept Michigan schools in neutral while schools in most other states have made multiple levels of coaching education, and even licensing or certification, standard operating procedure.

The three initiatives to upgrade coaches education in this critical area of health and safety over the next three years only nudges Michigan to a passing grade for what most parents and the public expect of our programs. We will still trail most other states, which continue to advance the grading curve.

And for a state association that is among the national leaders by almost every other measure, it is unacceptable to be below average in what is arguably the most important of all: promoting athlete health and safety by improving the preparation of coaches.

The third health and safety thrust is a focus on practice policies to improve acclimatization and to reduce head trauma; and the fourth thrust is a focus on game rules to reduce head trauma and to identify each sport’s most injurious situations and reduce their frequency.

Because of the critical attention to football on all levels, peewee to pros, our first focus has been to football with the appointment of a football task force which has effectively combined promotion of the sport’s safety record at the school level and its value to students, schools and communities with probing for ways to make the sport still safer.

The task force proposals for practice policies are receiving most attention and will receive Council action in March (and will be published on Second Half over the next few weeks). But the task force also has assisted MHSAA staff in developing promotional materials that are already in use, and the task force pointed MHSAA staff to playing rules that need emphasis or revision to keep school-based football as safe as possible.

During 2013-14, all MHSAA sport committees will be giving unprecedented time to the topics of the third and fourth thrusts and, when necessary, a task force will be appointed to supplement those sport committee efforts.

Frequently Asked Questions About CPR Certification 

Q. Who is authorized to provide CPR certification?
A. The MHSAA does not dictate which organization must provide the CPR education and certification. However, the Michigan Department of Human Services lists the following organizations that are approved to provide CPR training:

  • American CPR Training: www.americancpr.com
  • American Heart Association: www.americanheart.org
  • American Red Cross: www.redcross.org
  • American Safety and Health Institute: www.hsi.com/ashi/about
  • American Trauma Event Management: www.atem.us
  • Cardio Pulmonary Resource Center: 517-543-9180
  • Emergency Care and Safety Institute: www.ecsinstitute.org
  • EMS Safety Services: www.emssafety.com
  • Medic First Aid: www.medicfirstaid.com
  • National Safety Council: www.nsc.org
  • Pro CPR: www.procpr.org


Q.

How expensive is the certification?
A.  $0 to $75.
 
Q. How long does certification take?
A. Two to five hours.
 
Q. How long does the certification last?
A. Generally, two years.
 
Q. Does the MHSAA specify the age level for the CPR training?
A. No. Generally, the course for adults alerts candidates of the necessary modifications for children and infants, and vice versa.