Logo
Second Half by MHSAA

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.
 

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.