Fixing Schools
August 16, 2013
Our fall sports have begun and, as usual, our good coaches are focusing on fundamentals during these early weeks of practice and play, especially if they are trying to bounce back from some losing seasons. Meanwhile, I’ve been thinking about the fundamentals for fixing schools themselves.
If we really would get serious about a comeback season, we would . . .
-
Equip the best teachers to work in the worst places.
-
Provide the highest pay to the teachers working in the lowest grades.
-
Emphasize teachers more than technology,pre-Kindergarten more than college prep, andsmaller more than larger.
-
Encourage fight over flight,tutors over transfers,school improvement over school choice, andinvestment over vouchers.
- And, for Pete’s sake, we would allow public schools to start classes as early as they see fit, even next Monday, not two weeks and a day later as state law mandates. Longer is better than shorter.
And sooner is better than later for putting these fundamentals into our game plan for education.
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.