Logo

Head Trauma and Learning

November 23, 2012

Researchers at my alma mater have joined their voices to the growing chorus of concerns about the effects of repeated blows to the head.

A study of the cognitive effects of head impacts on members of Dartmouth College football, hockey, track, crew and Nordic ski teams compared before and after season results on learning and memory skills.  Participating athletes also came from Brown and Virginia Tech.

  • 22 percent of athletes in contact sports had lower results on learning and memory skills tests after their season.
  • Only 4 percent of athletes in non-contact sports posted lower test results.

The researchers caution that it is unknown at this point how long these negative effects may last, but they also note there is some correlation between test results and how hard the athletes were hitting heads.

This adds to the mounting evidence that rules writers, program sponsors, coaches and officials must look for and implement a variety of measures to reduce the frequency and severity of head impacts in both practice and competition in all sports.

A Can-Do Response

January 5, 2015

Michigan has a tradition of some of the nation’s most lenient out-of-season coaching rules, especially in the summer; and yet, the few rules we have are sometimes blamed for driving students to non-school programs.

Nevertheless, there is some validity to the criticism. It is observably true that non-school programs seem to fill every void in the interscholastic calendar. The day after high school seasons end, many non-school programs begin. The day a school coach can no longer work with more than three or four students, a non-school coach begins to do so.

The challenge is to balance the negative effects of an “arms war” in high school sports against driving students toward non-school programs. It’s the balance of too few vs. too many rules out of season.

The out-of-the-box compromise for this dilemma could be to not regulate the off season as much as to conduct school-sponsored off-season programs in a healthier way than they normally occur, i.e., to move schools back in control of and in the center of the non-school season. To not merely regulate what schools and coaches can’t do, but actually run the programs they can do and want to do.

Of course, this would require more of what schools have less of – resources. School administrators who may be in agreement that schools should operate off-season programs to keep kids attached to in-season programs still balk because they lack resources. At a time when resources are being cut for basic support of in-season programs, how could they justify spending more for out-of-season outreach?

Ultimately, in discovering the sweet spot for out-of-season interaction between school coaches with student-athletes, we need to give at least as much attention to providing more opportunity for what they can do together as for what they can’t do.