Pilot Programs 2.0
May 10, 2016
Two sideline concussion detection pilot programs launched with 62 schools at the start of the 2015-16 school year will continue in 2016-17, with several significant modifications.
For the upcoming school year, a smaller number of schools will be invited to participate, training will be both earlier and longer, and the focus will be on those sports which the MHSAA’s mandated concussion reporting by all high schools has identified as having the highest risk for head injuries.
The primary purpose for the MHSAA to initiate, drive and monitor these pilot programs is to emphasize the removal-from-play phase of the concussion care continuum, and to encourage more care, consistency and courage during that decision-making process.
Data from the most recent fall and winter seasons tends to demonstrate that schools in the pilot programs reported more concussions than non-pilot schools and they withheld students from activity longer than schools which did not participate in the pilot programs.
These tendencies are supported by both systems being tested, King-Devick and XLNTbrain, both of which have significant improvements in store for pilot schools in 2016-17.
The purpose of the pilot programs is not to select a single system to be recommended to or required of all MHSAA member schools, but to demonstrate to vendors how to serve the needs of our diverse constituency and to help our schools serve their student-athletes better. Further progress toward these purposes is a certainty during 2016-17.
Official Feedback
June 10, 2014
We receive much unsolicited comment about the performances of officials and the conduct of spectators. Here’s some of what the MHSAA does to actively solicit input from its key constituents.
Since 1956, the MHSAA has required member schools to provide numerical ratings of officials who work their contests. Since 1998, the system has also allowed schools to cite particular areas of perceived weakness; and doing so is required whenever a school provides a rating of “5” (worst) on the 1-to-5 scale.
There are many deficiencies in a system like this, including that it sometimes means that coaches or administrators are doing the rating, and some of them have never officiated and may not know the rules and mechanics as well as the officials. The rating can also be affected by whether the school won or lost.
Nevertheless, the system has value, not as a true evaluation of an official’s performance for any particular contest, but – when the ratings of all schools are combined over a three-year average – as a number that the official can use to understand his or her abilities relative to all other officials. And it’s a number the MHSAA can use, along with recommendations of local officials associations and assigners, when considering assignments to various levels of MHSAA tournaments.
It is also noteworthy that for 25 years, the MHSAA has used a reporting form allowed in some cases and required in others, whereby officials report unusual events to the MHSAA office immediately after contests. During a typical fall season, about 300 such reports will be filed; about 250 each winter season; about 200 each spring season. Any school which receives three or more negative reports over three seasons receives a letter of concern from the MHSAA and the school’s name is published in benchmarks; and any school that receives no such reports over three seasons receives a letter of praise.
In 2008-09, the MHSAA also began a program whereby officials could rate school sportsmanship. During the winter season of 2013-14, there were approximately 4,000 reports filed, including 2,400 in basketball. The Basketball Coaches Association of Michigan honors the best 100 schools where BCAM members are coaching.