Transfers 101
September 21, 2011
A recent blog (“Troubling Transfers”) brought us several responses where the writer had student-specific issues, to which we do not respond here. Questions about a particular pupil should first be addressed to the local school’s administration. If the school needs help with the answer or wishes to prepare a request for waiver, MHSAA staff is ready to help.
One writer sought a list of the 15 exceptions to the automatic ineligibility of a transferring student. Here are brief summaries (not the full rule):
Eight Residency Exceptions –
1. Student moves with the people he/she was living with previously (full & complete).
2. Student not living with parents moves back in with them.
3. Ward of the Court, placed with foster parents.
4. Foreign exchange student moves in with host family who resides in district. Two semesters/three trimesters only.
5. Married student moves into school district.
8. Student moves with or to divorced parent.
12. An 18-year-old moves without parents.
13. A student resides in a boarding school.
Five School Status Exceptions –
6. School ceases to operate, not merged.
7. School is reorganized or consolidated.
9. School board orders safety transfer or enrollment shift.
11. Student achieved highest grade available in former school.
15. New school established; student enrolled on first day.
Two Student Status Exceptions –
10. Incoming first-time 9th grader.
14. Expelled student returns under preexisting criteria.
In three cases (exceptions 8, 12 and 13), an Educational Transfer Form must be completed by administrators of both schools and the MHSAA before the student may participate.
In four cases (exceptions 2, 8, 12 and 13), the exception may only be utilized once by a student while enrolled in grades 9 through 12.
There is also a provision where a student may request a waiver at the subvarsity level for a 9th- or 10th-grade student who has never played any MHSAA tournament sport in high school.
I recognize this is all “un-bloglike,” but the topic of transfers brought some basic and general questions that we could answer here.
Helmet Debate Escalates in Girls Lacrosse
July 2, 2015
Recently the Florida High School Activities Association escalated the girls lacrosse helmet debate to higher levels by mandating the equipment during competition involving its member schools. I’m guessing their hearts are in the right place; but without a recognized performance standard yet established for such protective head gear, there are important practical questions added to the philosophical debate over the efficacy of such a requirement at this time. Here’s what we posted on this topic nearly two years ago.
One of our newest sports – girls lacrosse – is today presenting one of the oldest conundrums in competitive athletics.
On one side of the complex issues are many moms and dads who cite the dangers their daughters confront from contact to the head and face by other players’ sticks or the ball. They want hard helmets with face masks required in girls lacrosse. Many coaches and administrators agree.
On the other side of the issues are the “purists,” including the official position of US Lacrosse, who are concerned that by increasing head and face protection the rule makers would invite the kind of hard and high contact that would fundamentally alter the nature of the game and lead to more serious injuries in girls lacrosse.
This is the classic dilemma that the leadership and playing rules bodies of sports organizations have faced many times over many years for many sports. Justifiably.
When football added helmets, then face masks and then mouth protectors to the list of required equipment, there was a significant reduction in broken noses and chipped teeth, but techniques of blocking and tackling changed. The protected head and face became much more of a target and weapon than it had been before, and the unprotectable neck and spine became more at risk.
Some would argue that ice hockey’s experience is similar to football’s history. The discussion in the soccer community regarding hard helmets for goalkeepers and soft helmets for all other players often revolves around similar questions. Will required protective equipment change the game? And will one of the changes be that the game becomes still rougher and even more injurious, trading “moderate” injuries for more catastrophic?
While the debate continues over additional head protection requirements for girls lacrosse, and other sports, both sides seem to agree that the burden of the rule makers to be out-front in the search for ways to improve the rules is matched by the in-the-trenches responsibility of coaches to teach the game and officials to administer the contests in accordance with existing rules which already place a premium on participant safety.