Server upgrade complete!

Welcome to the upgraded server! If you notice anything wrong with the board, please let Jeffrey know!Free packets for study/practiceAnnounced tournament dates

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Discussion of quizbowl topics not related to specific tournaments
Post Reply
Online
User avatar
socalcaptain
Posts: 1395
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by socalcaptain » Thu Feb 05, 2009 1:36 pm

Here's what MSHSAA principals, ADs, etc., had to say at the area meetings held recently:
6. Academic Competition -- To restrict nonschool competition during the season.
Smith-Cotton (Central District): Is this an issue? Put some sportsmanship rules in. Discipline that child. If one
advisory does this for an activity then other activities may. Could academic competition reduce the season time
line? if you can discipline this student then do, if not maybe this should change. 100% against this.
Moberly (Northeast District): Not a big concern. All about kids getting smart. 100% opposed to restricting
nonschool academic competition.
Blue Springs South (Kansas City District): Struggle to field teams, if the advisory committee recommended
something to better the activity we should support them. Would this be more restrictive and cause fewer to
participate? It would be difficult to say kids are learning too much. 100% oppose.
Waynesville (South Central District): Let them have fun and go do whatever they want. 100% in favor lf letting
them do what they want.
South Harrison (Northwest District): Athletics is safety.
McCluer South-Berkeley (St. Louis District): Trivia nights - policy. Limit academic knowledge. 100% opposed.
Republic (Southwest District): No comment. 100%opposed.
Dexter (Southeast District): Would this affect Beta or local trivia nights? Why not? Here for academics. 100%
opposed.
To me, it seems like most people are in favor of letting us do what we want. This seems like a big bonus for us as far as support from schools themselves. They all seem to see the light that all they would be doing by restricting us is keeping kids from learning.

User avatar
redliberte
Posts: 422
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:00 am

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by redliberte » Thu Feb 05, 2009 1:44 pm

To be honest, I'm not sure what they're even talking about. Can you explain it?

User avatar
DeckardCain
Posts: 4400
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Viburnum, Missouri
Contact:

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by DeckardCain » Thu Feb 05, 2009 1:56 pm

From what I can tell, these "area meetings" consisted of ADs and principals from each of the eight MSHSAA-defined regions of the state meeting to discuss issues facing MSHSAA, and when the issue of restricting non-school academic competition came up, all eight regions came out against it. Seems encouraging.

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by Charlie Dees » Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:15 pm

The majority of these responses rock.

FishyFreshman
Posts: 501
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 11:00 pm
Contact:

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by FishyFreshman » Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:52 pm

The wording is a little awkward, but what I got was that pretty much everyone wants quiz bowl to get better and abolish restrictions.

User avatar
ajax
Posts: 942
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Hume, MO

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by ajax » Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:55 pm

socalcaptain wrote:
6. Academic Competition -- To restrict nonschool competition during the season.
Smith-Cotton (Central District): Is this an issue? Put some sportsmanship rules in. Discipline that child. If one
advisory does this for an activity then other activities may. Could academic competition reduce the season time
line? if you can discipline this student then do, if not maybe this should change. 100% against this.
Moberly (Northeast District): Not a big concern. All about kids getting smart. 100% opposed to restricting
nonschool academic competition.
Blue Springs South (Kansas City District): Struggle to field teams, if the advisory committee recommended
something to better the activity we should support them. Would this be more restrictive and cause fewer to
participate? It would be difficult to say kids are learning too much. 100% oppose.
Waynesville (South Central District): Let them have fun and go do whatever they want. 100% in favor lf letting
them do what they want.
South Harrison (Northwest District): Athletics is safety.
McCluer South-Berkeley (St. Louis District): Trivia nights - policy. Limit academic knowledge. 100% opposed.
Republic (Southwest District): No comment. 100%opposed.
Dexter (Southeast District): Would this affect Beta or local trivia nights? Why not? Here for academics. 100%
opposed.
What is this stuff? "Limit academic knowledge. Athletics is safety, and who is the kid being disciplined"? What is non-school competition?


<div class="editby">Edited by <a href='http://s4.zetaboards.com/Academic_Compe ... /'>ajax</a>, Feb 5 2009, 02:56:51 PM.</div>

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by Charlie Dees » Thu Feb 05, 2009 3:04 pm

It's about the rule MSHSAA proposed to ban students from being able to attend academic/trivia competitions that are not dictated by school affiliation, such as open quizbowl tournaments. The wording is nebulous, and could potentially bad things like bar trivia, school trivia nightss, along with attendance at a lot of good tournaments.

User avatar
Jeffrey Hill
Posts: 6358
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 11:00 pm
Location: In between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown (aka Johnson County, KS)
Contact:

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by Jeffrey Hill » Thu Feb 05, 2009 4:05 pm

Where did you see this? What about the rest of the proposals?

At any rate, it is definitely good to see significant opposition to the proposed nonschool competition restriction.

--edit-- nevermind; didn't see it on the Academic Competition page, but that's because the meeting covered all activities.Here's the PDF from which this came which was linked to on the front page of MSHSAA's website.


<div class="editby">Edited by <a href='http://s4.zetaboards.com/Academic_Compe ... /88961/'>U. Lou Sthagaim</a>, Feb 5 2009, 04:09:40 PM.</div>

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by Charlie Dees » Thu Feb 05, 2009 4:31 pm

Yeah, actually I'm curious about the legal standing of this rule, because it seems that this present some very interesting right to privacy violations if put in place.

User avatar
Jeffrey Hill
Posts: 6358
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 11:00 pm
Location: In between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown (aka Johnson County, KS)
Contact:

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by Jeffrey Hill » Thu Feb 05, 2009 4:49 pm

For those unfamiliar with the issue, this is the proposed by-law addition in question:
New By-Law 292.0 NON-SCHOOL COMPETITION

During the season a student represents his or her school by competing in an interscholastic contest:

a. He or she shall neither practice nor compete as a member of a non-school team or as an individual participant in organized non-school competition that meets the MSHSAA academic competition definition. A competition shall be considered "organized" if any of the following conditions exist: competition is scheduled and publicized in advance, official score is kept, individual or team standings are maintained, official timer or game officials are used, admission is charged, teams are regularly formed or team rosters are predetermined, squad members are dressed in team uniforms or a team is privately or commercially sponsored. Further, competition which is either directly or indirectly sponsored, promoted or administered by an individual, organization, or any other agency shall be considered organized.

b. A student shall not have competed at any time as a member of a junior college or a senior college team if he or she desires to compete in academic competition in high school.

c. A student who joins a school team for the first time must have abided by these restrictions beginning with the first day of the current season.

Charbroil
Posts: 1039
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:00 am

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by Charbroil » Fri Feb 06, 2009 10:55 am

Wait...so does this mean that this rule hasn't been passed yet? I always thought that the rule had been passed and that when we were complaining about it a few months ago, we were dealing with its aftermath.

So, seeing as how "Many regular-season collegiate tournaments are "de facto" open due to the competitive and financial need to fill out fields in any way possible" (http://www.doc-ent.com/qbwiki/index.php?title=Open), does this mean that we've always had the option of forming scratch teams for College touranments which we would like to attend?

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by Charlie Dees » Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:02 am

Yeah. I'm pretty sure there have been stray posts in threads about this rule noting that it isn't technically in place.

Online
User avatar
socalcaptain
Posts: 1395
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

MSHSAA Area Meetings Comments

Post by socalcaptain » Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:06 am

It has always been my understanding that prior to the proposed establishment of this rule, yes. I may be wrong (i.e., missed something).

It was also my understanding that you could do anything you want as long as you didn't compete under the name of the school - for instance, you could compete on a fundraiser trivia team under the name "We Built This City" and yet have the team totally composed of students from your high school team, with the caveat that obviously you couldn't wear official team shirts or use team nametags, etc., or in any way publicize that your team is representing the school.

The way it looks, I think this will continue to be true. Feel free to correct me if any of the above facts are wrong.

Post Reply