STA has been 6A since olathe south, olathe east, sm northwest, and all the bv schools have been built.

olathe north was 5A only in football and only for one cycle directly following olathe's splitting that school.

Did you make a boo boo typo when you said STA has been a 6A since.......

SM Northwest was built in 1969 and I believe they have been in the top Classification since that time.

STA won the 6A State Wrestling Championship in 2005.

No i did not. olathe south was opened in 1984, olathe east 1996, sm northwest in 1969, blue valley west in 2001, and olathe northwest in 2003. STA won 6A state championship in 2005.

OK. History of Champs shows they wom 6A wrestling in 2005. How or Why 6A that year. Years prior to 2005 years since History of Champs shows they are 5A in all other sports. They are now shown as 5A.

Change my SM NW to Olathe NW. Think they came into being within tyhe last few years

as i mentioned in my last post they came into existence in 2003, still prior to 2005

Private school teams may face tougher competition

BY JOANNA CHADWICK
The Wichita Eagle
A survey of Kansas high school administrators by the state's governing body for high school sports found that many think private schools have an unfair advantage over public schools.

So the Kansas State High School Activities Association's board of directors will consider two proposals next month that would either make private schools compete by themselves in postseason play or make them compete at a higher enrollment level.

No immediate changes are likely, but proponents of the changes say the discussion is important. Either change would radically alter the structure of the KSHSAA's current classification system.

"This would be one of the most significant deviations from the way we've done business in the past," said Bill Faflick, athletic director for the City League, which is the city's seven public high schools that have athletics plus parochial schools Bishop Carroll and Kapaun Mount Carmel.

Of the two proposals, the one seemingly more popular would move private schools up one classification. Carroll, with 819 students in grades 10-12 this year, and Kapaun, with 667, would move from Class 5A to 6A, where the smallest school this year has 1,066 students.

A private school such as Wichita Trinity Academy, a small Class 4A school, would move up to 5A.

"We have only about 300 students, and now we're competing against schools that have 900?" said Trinity headmaster/principal Matt Brewer. "We can't play football against Hutchinson. We'd be putting kids at risk."

Clay Center principal Mike Adams, a board of directors member who helped draft the proposal, said it would equalize schools, especially because private schools aren't limited to the same boundaries as public schools.

"We have to take the kids that walk through our doors," Adams said.

In Classes 4A, 3A and 2A, the public schools are rural while the private schools come from urban areas. Trinity is part of the Central Plains League with the Independent School and eight rural schools.

The second proposal is more dramatic with seemingly less chance of passing. It puts the state's 26 private schools into their own playoff structure in all sports. It also divides Class 4A into two divisions, essentially creating 11 postseason classes for football and eight for all other sports.

States such as Texas and Tennessee have separate public and private state championships, but each has around 300 private schools.

"I think it would be unfair to put the 26 schools together and have us supposedly play Berean Academy," Carroll president Tish Nielsen said. Berean Academy, in Elbing, is a 2A school with 103 students in its three upper grades.

But many public schools don't think it's fair to compete against private schools.

"I think it's become more of an issue in the past 10 years," said Campus principal Myron Regier, who is on the KSHSAA board of directors.

Possible explanations include increased emphasis on high school athletics, earning college scholarships and winning state championships.

Private schools, which make up 7 percent of the association's member schools, are successful at tournament time. In the current school year, Wichita Collegiate has won Class 3A titles in football, volleyball, girls tennis and boys basketball.

At the Class 5A girls basketball tournament, three of the final four teams were private schools, and the boys 5A title was won by Bishop Miege, in Roeland Park.

Private schools counter that plenty of public schools have similar traditions — Heights became the first school in the state's largest classification to play for a title in football and boys and girls basketball, and Hutchinson has won six straight football titles.

"Of everything completed so far (this school year), privates have won almost 32 percent of all championships, and many public schools feel that private schools have an advantage," Clay Center's Adams said.

2006 comparison

In 2006, the KSHSAA created a committee that studied the private-public issue. The main finding was that private schools "earn a disproportionate percentage of postseason final eight, final four and championship game opportunities when compared to public schools."

"A lot of people thought we stopped short —'You need to go ahead and do something about it,' " KSHSAA executive director Gary Musselman said.

Yet the focus on state championships concerns some.

"If that's how programs are being evaluated, they're missing the mark," Faflick said. "(Sports is) for connecting kids to school, teaching life lessons, teaching teamwork, discipline. All are evident if they win or lose at the end of the year."

Gardner-Edgerton principal Tim Brady, part of the proposal to split private schools from championships, is frustrated watching private schools dominate. He links that dominance to recruiting.

Allegations of recruiting and private schools giving athletic scholarships to entice top athletes often crop up. But Musselman said he has found no evidence of recruiting in his 22 years on the job.

Carroll's Nielsen is distressed at the questions of recruiting.

"I don't want them to question our integrity," she said. "I want them to know we're following the rules and guidelines."

Long road to change

It is doubtful that April's board of directors meeting will be more than a discussion. If the board of directors votes to agree to either of the proposals — or comes up with its own proposal — there are still hurdles.

A majority of the board would have to vote to put it on the agenda for its next meeting, in September, and a majority of all schools in all classes must approve it.

Discussion is fine with DeSoto principal David Morford, who was part of the proposal for splitting public and private championships.

"It's getting talked about. That's our goal,'' he said.

"We don't necessarily have the right answer, but we want to have the dialogue with everybody to have a solution that's workable to everybody."

http://www.kansas.com/2010/03/26/1242039/private-school-teams-may-face.html

Read the conclusion of the 2006/07 report by The Public and Private School Study Committee.


The Public and Private School Study Committee
Report to the KSHSAA
September 26, 2007

There were 18 committee members 14 from public schools and
4 from private schools on the committee. I will get a full copy of the report as soon as possible.

Meeting dates were:
March 27, 2006
May 1, 2006
February 14, 2007
June 21, 2007
September 13, 2007

Conclusion of the report:

The Public-Private Committee Study Committee recognizes and agrees that inequities exist between member schools; however, not all inequities fall between public and private lines. The numerous factors referenced in this report help distinguish one school from another and provide differing opportunites for school communities to achieve and grow. The Committee challenges each school to dedicate its efforts in working to achieve goals and principles of a healthy interscholastic program.

BY JOANNA CHADWICK
The Wichita Eagle


A survey of Kansas high school administrators by the state's governing body for high school sports found that many think private schools have an unfair advantage over public schools.

Does anyone have a copy of the recent SURVREY and the supporting data tables and what questions were all asked about the success or non-success of various athletic programs? Did the survey include only public school administrators? Was it a phone survey or a well thought out written survey approved by the board?

"Does anyone have a copy of the recent SURVREY and the supporting data tables and what questions were all asked about the success or non-success of various athletic programs? Did the survey include only public school administrators? Was it a phone survey or a well thought out written survey approved by the board?"


RECENT SURVEY or the one that was done in 2007. I know of no RECENT survey.

The survey in 2007 was written.

ALL MEMBER schools received it.

Was it well written? I thought it was, you may think otherwise.

About 15% of P/P schools were represented on the special committee and less than 5% of the Public Schools were represented.

Another way of looking at it from the numbers perspective is that if you are referring to the same 18 member committee that smokey mentioned in his post above, where 14 were public and 4 private that means 78% were public and only 22% private. Now that is probably more than fair to the private schools based on their actual percentage in the membership, but in a straight up or down vote the private schools will not have much of a chance in succeeding.

Greg, did the committee take into consideration special situations where you have exceptional long term coaches like Gwen Pike, volleyball at Bishop Miege and Terry English girls basketball at Bishop Miege? I think you have to because good coaching and program development due to good coaching is a factor that I think that some people do not want to acknowledge enough and tend to dismiss. The parents of athletes though realize for sure the value of that coaching and that is true whether it is public or private schools. Why is Miege so dominant in girls volleyball and basketball in comparison even to other private schools in the area over the last thirty years? Is it not because of Terry English and Gwen Pike? Why is Bishop Ward such a dominant baseball team even over other area private schools over the last several years? How much of a factor is their excellent coach Dennis Hurla in that success? How big of a factor is Craig Ewing's excellent coaching in the Aquinas soccer team's success in their boys and girls teams success? It seems to me that the easy explanation for the public school interests is that the disparity is being caused primarily due to the private school's ability to enroll students from a broader area but it fails to adequately recognize the amount of students that private schools lose to public schools due to tuition and other financial factors, good coaching, and a possible difference of committment from the athletes themselves.

By the way Contrarion, Aquinas was 6A for a few years and has great soccer success at both 6A and 5A in that period. I am pretty sure that all the 6A soccer teams would like for them to stay at 5A. Here is their state championship track record:

2003 6A 1st
2004 6A 1st
2005 5A 1st
2006 6A 1st
2007 5A 1st
2008 5A 1st
2009 5A 1st Also ranked as the No.1 team in Nation in final poll

So you can see they varied between 6A and 5A but once St. James was established they landed in 5A in 2007 and have stayed there since then.

Vince,

My numbers reference representation of the member schools. I was not part of the committee so I cannot speak to what was and was not considered/discussed and/or what rabbit trails they followed in their meetings.

The report states the number of championships won by P/P schools is out of line with the number of P/P schools. No remedial action was recommended BY THE COMMITTEE. Given the overwhelming numbers of public school representation on the committee it is obvious to me the group worked to consensus and not by vote.

At the meeting where I the heard the report of the committee's work, the presenter was a member of the committee; a lady principal of a parochial high school (sorry her name and school are lost in my aged memory).

Jimmies and Joes or X's and O's?

Greg:

They are both important but in a long term success record like that achieved by the SM Northwest cross country program, the SM East swimming/diving program, the Hutchinson football program, the old SM North, Lawrence, and Manhattan football programs, and the old Wyandotte basketball program you can not deny that the X's and O's is the dominant factor in the program's long term success. Here is an interesting article that I found on your saying:

http://ezinearticles.com/?Is-Winning-Abo...&id=1170288

Youth Football Coaching Facts

When coaching youth football we have all heard the adage "It's not about the X's and the O's it's about the Jimmys and the Joes. In essence what that saying is trying to tell you is; Youth Football is all about talent levels, it has nothing to do with coaching or schemes. The next time you hear that saying, please consider the source. Is he a youth football coach that consistently has poor performing teams? How convenient to put the onus solely on the players for the teams success. By doing this the coach can avoid any personal responsibility for his teams failure or success. He might as well be playing lotto, because what he is saying is the success or failure of his team rests solely on who is living in his area, is of age and has signed up for the team.

Lack of Consistency In the "Talent" Crowd

Let's take a few steps back and start at the base of this irresponsible premise:

According to these guys ALL youth football players are created uniquely different, some are very good, some are average and some are poor. The premise states that because of these wide variations in player talent levels, the productivity of the teams they play on varies in direct proportions to these players unique abilities.

Now how about the coaches? Since it is 100% about the Jimmies and the Joes, coaching and schemes don't matter much at all, I guess all coaches and schemes MUST be equal.

So God created all these football players uniquely different with various amounts of athletic ability, intelligence, drive, determination and decision making ability BUT when it comes to football coaches God decided nope, I'm going to make all these guys EXACTLY alike. If that is correct, what happens when a football player who the "Jimmys and Joes" crowd says is so uniquely different than anyone else becomes a coach? Does this unique person all of a sudden changed into a clone of all other coaches? Does God say "You are different when you have that helmet on, but once I see you with the helmet off and a whistle around your neck, I'm going to change you into a clone of all the other coaches out there?"

Of course not, this is some silly premise made up by coaches whose teams don't do well to make themselves feel better about themselves.

Does talent matter? Sure it does, but so does coaching and so do schemes. We have all seen very athletic and physically imposing teams lose to less talented teams, it happens every week in youth football. There are coaches in our league both mine and with our opponents whose teams win no matter the level, age group or talent levels of the teams they have. In my youth football organization I knew that any team I gave to Stacy B to or Jay S would do very well and they always did. The talent levels varied greatly on these guys teams every year, but their results varied only slightly. The same can be said of coaches like Monte O, Bill, Rich D and Scott P who coach against us. They win year in and year out, no matter the age group, division or talent levels.

Just like players, coaches can get better and all's it takes is a commitment and some time to educate and prepare yourself to be a better coach. Obviously you are on right path if you are taking the time to be on this site and read this article.

What to Do

When your youth football team plays well, give the players all the credit, when they play poorly accept the blame yourself and learn from the experience.



By the way I am not personally opposed to the multiplier effect for most sports. I think in a sport like football that requires more players that it needs to be a lower factor. I still think even with the multiplier that the good coaches will still have a dominant track record in state championships. SM Northwest's cross country coach Van Rose would win a lot of state titles no matter what level he was coaching as would Craig Ewing the Aquinas soccer coach.

IMO the biggest advantage of private schools is that they do not have the riff raff that public schools do that count towards their enrollment, but contribute little towards anything extra curricular.

That is unless you consider smoking extra curricular.

Most kids at private/parochial schools come from supportive homes and want to and are expected to be a productive part of the system. 10-15% of their enrollment is not transient, completing less than even one school year.

If you removed all of those kids from our district, there is absolutely no doubt that we would lower at least one classification. That is why a multiplier makes sense to me.

Why bring up bowling?

Can't deny that good programs win lots of trophies. What's a program? Starts with kids/athletes. Athletes start in community rec and club sports, including CYO, PAL, etc---also includes parents who encourage, support, transport kids to activities. Then comes coaches who can put kids together to make teams. If a team wins it may establish a tradition, which brings more kids into youth sports who then want to play in and with the winning tradition. BUT, without the kids, tradition, etc, coaches are nothing but teachers drawing additional pay for "coaching???" The issue before us is kids--not coaches!!

You mention some successful public school programs. When Lawrence High football was steamrolling everyone their enrollment I think was close to 3000 student---or at least twice any other school. They had enough kids/athletes to each year to roster two championship team. Public school dynastys come and go. Lawrence built a second high school and neither Lawrence or Free State has come close to the records of the old Lawrence HS. Yep, Hutch has been on a football roll for the last five or six years--don't see where they did much before then.

These public school achievements no way compare to the disproportionate state qualifiers, placers and championships of private and parochial schoos.

I know that you are pretty convinced that the private schools need to be handicapped in some way and I realize you are far from the only one that feels that way.

I still can't believe how easily you dismiss the value of a great coach in a team's success. The very example that you bring up of the Hutchinson football team only being on a roll for the last six years is for me one of my primary examples of the value of a great coach in a team's success. I am including a link to an article that will detail to you the state of the Hutchinson football program before Randy Dreiling arrived in 1998 and how he turned it around. I think you should be able to see after reading that article that Great Coaches do make a big difference in programs. If you still don't think so please explain to us why you think Hutchinson's football program fortunes turned around if it was not due to Randy Dreiling becoming their coach.

http://www.vype.com/centralkansas/general/3223

Also please explain to me why SM Northwest is able to have such great cross country success (I believe they have 31 girls and boys state track titles during Coach Van Rose's career). Explain to me in detail what it is peculiar about the SM Northwest area that gives it such an advantage in enrolling great cross country runners. Tell me why you do not think this type of success is also not due to Great Coaching.

Explain to me why Nebraska's and Oklahoma's football program faded after Tom Osborne and Barry Switzer retired.

Not all the private school athletic programs are having great success not even in the schools that have one or two successfull programs. For instance Bishop Ward has baseball but what other sport is it having that type of success in? I think what you will find is that the most successful private school athletic programs are the ones that have Great Coaches and Great Coaches do make a difference whether it is public or private.

I don't think we can ever handicap Great Coaching. Most of us realize that great coaching is a big factor in a program's success and it has also been a big factor in the success of many of these long term successful private school athletic programs in Kansas.

As I said public school dynasties come and go. Private schhol dynasties seem to go on forever. It is just not the number of state championships, it is the filling of the state level brackets with the private school team. Go look at the brackets. If there are multiple private schools in a class in a sport, at least 1/4 to 1/2 of the schools will be private.

Not to knock their team or school, my middle son went there and played there, but look at Leavenworth HS Football. This has to be the worst record in Kansas. I know of a 26 year list of good coaches. Could not win. May a game or 2 some year, followed by no wins for the next couple of years. Why all these losses. A big percentage of the kids are military dependents. Dad will only be stationed at Fort Leavenworth for a couple of years. A good kid comes in as a freshman--coaches work with him and he show promise--dad is reassigned and the kid moves. Or a kid comes in as a senior and the coach gets him for only one year. All good coaches who burn out and leave after three or four years. Or, use Leavenworth basketnall. That coach has been there for a long time and every year produces a good team. How, most of his players are not military kids, so they are in the Leavenworth system through middle and high school.

Yes, coaches do make a difference. But, I still contend kids are the main factor in successful program.

Lets us example of a super exceptional private school sports dybnasty. Rockhurst HS. Rockhurst HS sit on the east side of State line Road in KC MO. Across the street is the State of Kansas (the Shawnee Mission USD). I do not know but I would guess that there are student (and athletes) from Kansas who go to Rockhurst. Hell of an attendance area---South KCMO plus a good chunk of Johnson County, KS. If not then I am wrong---perhaps Missouri has a rule that prevents out of state residents attending MSHSAA menmber schools.

You, in your support of the private school dominance in athletics, refuse to rationaize why they are so, and by emphasizing the coaches, are ignoring the student athletes and how so many of the top few get to your schools year after year. Is it Cokely's promotion, is it recruiting, is the unrestricted residence area. What is it. It is just not Bill Mason who thinks this, but a whole lot of public school coaches, administrators, athletes, parents and fans.

Some questions need to be asked and answered.

I have nothing personal against private or parochial schools. We are not Catholic. We sent our youngest son to a local Catholic elementary school--until we pulled him out because of a wacko nun teacher and a wacko nun principal. The son was drawing skateboarder symbols and the nuns were adament he was drawing swastikas. Had the nuns ask him what a swastika was and he said he did not know. when I asked the nuns how many of the 5th graders could explain immaculate conception, thats when we parted company!

New Proposal will have 112 state champions in Kansas and 560 state placers in the 14 weights over 8 classes. That is if I read the proposal correct. That is a lot of hardware. The powers to be say it will not cost KSHSAA more money. They do say it will cost individual schools (or their members) more money for post season activities - tough call during huge statewide budget problems. The money has to come from somwhere.

The way I read this proposal: is public schools will go from 4 classes to 7 classifications and the private schools will be in their own division or 8th classification.

Art. 1: All member senior high schools shall be divided into
eight classes- 6A, 5A, 4A1, 4A2, 3A, 2A, 1A and All Private.
Class 6A shall include the thirty-two (32) public
high schools with the largest enrollments; Class 5A the
next thirty-two (32) public high schools; Class 4A1 the
next thirty-two (32) public high schools; Class 4A2 the
next thirty-two (32) public high schools; Class 3A the
next sixty-four (64) public high schools; Class 2A the next
forty-eight (48) public high schools and Class 1A , the
remainder public high schools; and an all Private school
classification.


Below is the Link to KSHSAA April, 2010 Board Meeting and items being voted on.

http://www.kshsaa.org/BODAgendaAP.pdf


Kansas State High School Activities Association
BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA
MEETING LOCATION—KSHSAA OFFICE, 601 SW Commerce Place,
Topeka Kansas
Friday, April 23, 2010—4 p.m.
(hearings and discussion only)
Saturday, April 24, 2010—9 a.m.
(final action and Executive Board elections)
Bylaws, XVI, amendments, state:
Section 1: The bylaws and articles of incorporation may be amended at any regular or called meeting of the Board of Directors
by a majority vote of those present of the Board of Directors, and the approval of the Kansas State Board of Education.
Section 2: KSHSAA Board of Directors’ agenda items must be presented in writing to the Association Executive Director 40 days
in advance of the September and April meetings. Only those items submitted by the following will be recognized:
1. Board of Directors members
2. Executive Board, provided the item received a majority vote of those present
3. Superintendents, principals and board of education members of member schools
4. Board of Directors may add items, which were not previously published on the agenda, at the time of the meeting, provided
it is done by three-fourths vote of those present.
On page 22 of the KSHSAA Handbook, under Rules and Regulations Governing Grades 7-12, the first paragraph concerning
AMENDMENTS reads as follows:
The rules and regulations for grades seven through twelve (grade school, middle school, junior high and senior high) may be
amended at any regular or called meeting of the board of Directors by a majority vote of the entire membership.
In the 1981 legislative session, the following, which applies to unified school districts, was passed:
Any member who abstains from voting shall be counted as voting against the motion or resolution. If a member
announces a conflict of interest with regard to the issue, the member may leave the meeting until the vote on the issue is
concluded and the member who abstains from voting thereby shall not be counted as having voted. K.S.A. 72-8205.
(Unless otherwise indicated, underlined portions are recommended changes in rules.)
Friday, April 23
1. Call to Order and Welcome. - President
2. Roll Call, Announcements and Introduction
of Members - Executive Director
3. State of Association Remarks.
- Executive Director
4. Introduction of Agenda Items. - President
5. Public Forum. – (speaker registration
required)
6. Break
7. Discussion on Agenda Action Items.
-Board of Directors
8. Adjourn
1. Each Handbook rule is divided into three sections:
Section 1: General Regulations (apply to grades 7-12)
Section 2: Senior High Regulations
Section 3: Middle/Junior High School Regulations (includes students in grades 7 and 8, middle
school and junior high)
2. Unless stated otherwise, articles passed by a majority of the members present will become effective
upon publication of the minutes.
2 April Board Agenda
Saturday, April 24
9. Call to Order and Roll Call
10. Approve September 16, 2009 Minutes
KSHSAA Bylaw - ARTICLE XII
Classification of Senior High Schools
Section 1: A classification system shall be established for
senior high schools involved in interscholastic activities under
the supervision of the KSHSAA.
Sec. 2: The classification system for each activity is based
upon criteria developed and approved by the KSHSAA Board
of Directors.
Sec. 3: The Executive Board may combine or separate Classes
at any time if the number of participating schools in an activity
so warrants.
Sec. 4: Modification of the classification system may be proposed
by the KSHSAA Board of Directors, the Executive Board, or
by petition from a member school. A petition must be signed
by the principal and superintendent of at least 20 percent
of the schools in the Classes modified by the proposal and
presented to the KSHSAA Executive Director by December 1
of any school year. Any proposal, before it becomes effective,
shall be approved first by the KSHSAA Board of Directors,
and second, by a majority of all schools affected and a majority
of all Classes affected. When only two Classes are affected,
the proposal must have a majority support from each Class.
11. Modify Rule 5, Classification of Senior High
Schools, Section 2, Article 6, to read as follows:
Art. 1: All member senior high schools shall be divided into
six Classes—6A, 5A, 4A, 3A, 2A and 1A. Class 6A shall
include the thirty-two (32) high schools with the largest
enrollments; Class 5A the next thirty-two (32); 4A the next
sixty-four (64); 3A the next sixty-four (64); 2A the next
sixty-four (64); and Class 1A, the remainder.
Art. 1: All member senior high schools shall be divided into
eight classes- 6A, 5A, 4A1, 4A2, 3A, 2A, 1A and All Private.
Class 6A shall include the thirty-two (32) public
high schools with the largest enrollments; Class 5A the
next thirty-two (32) public high schools; Class 4A1 the
next thirty-two (32) public high schools; Class 4A2 the
next thirty-two (32) public high schools; Class 3A the
next sixty-four (64) public high schools; Class 2A the next
forty-eight (48) public high schools and Class 1A , the
remainder public high schools; and an all Private school
classification.
FOOTBALL EXCEPTION: Classifications, for the purpose
of determining district football assignments, shall be
based on the total enrollment in the school’s ninth, tenth
and eleventh grades as submitted to the KSHSAA on the
date established by state statute for official enrollment.
For the purpose of district football, utilizing this exception,
member schools will be classified as follows:
Class 6A: 32 largest member schools playing 11-Man
football
Class 5A: 32 next largest member schools playing 11-
Man football
Class 4A: 64 next largest member schools playing 11-
Man football
Class 3A: 64 next largest member schools playing 11-
Man football
Class 2-1A: All other member schools playing 11-Man
football
8-Man: participating schools will be assigned to two
separate Divisions, as established by the Executive Board
NOTE: For 8-Man district football participation, assignments
shall be limited to those schools with a maximum
enrollment of 100 students in grades 9, 10 and 11. (See
Rule 35-2-3, Football.)
Class 6A: 32 largest member public high schools playing
11-Man football
Class 5A: 32 next largest member public high schools
playing 11-Man football
Class 4A1: 32 next largest member public high schools
playing 11-Man football
Class 4A2: 32 next largest member public high schools
playing 11-Man football
Class 3A: 64 next largest member public high schools
playing 11-Man football
Class 2A: 48 next largest member public high schools
playing 11-Man football
Class 1A: All other member public high schools playing
11-Man football
8-Man: participating member high schools will be assigned
to two separate Divisions, as established by the
Executive Board.
Private: participating member private high schools will
be assigned to at least two separate divisions, as established
by the Executive Board. (8 man Private schools to
be assigned by the Executive Board per Article XII sec. III)
NOTE: For 8-man district football participation, assignments
shall be limited to those schools with a maximum
enrollment of 100 students 9, 10 and 11. (See Rule 35-
2-3, Football.)
Schools not requesting a football district assignment will
have their position filled in each category by the next
school moving up in enrollment.
Class 1A Exception: Class 1A schools shall compete in two
separate divisions in volleyball, basketball and scholar’s
bowl for post-season and KSHSAA state championship
competition. (Effective 2010-11)
Following annual classification and determination of
schools assigned to Class 1A, the half of the schools with
the larger enrollments will be assigned to Division I and
the half with smaller enrollments will be assigned to Division
II. If Class 1A has an odd number of schools, Division
I will be assigned one more school than Division II.
Source of Recommendation: Frontier League (2-26-2010)
2010 3
12. Modify Rule 5, Classification of Senior High
Schools, Section 2, Article 6, to read as follows:
Art. 6: In classifying high schools for activity purposes, those
composed entirely of boys or girls shall double their enrollment
figures. For example, a boys’ school comprised of 125
students would be placed in the same classification as a
coeducational school with 250 students. In classifying high
schools for activity purposes, private or parochial schools
shall be placed in the next classification above based on
student enrollment as currently outlined in Article 1 and
Article 3 of Rule 5. For example, a private or parochial
school classified as a 2A school based on enrollment would
be placed in one classification above or 3A for all activities.
Source of Recommendation: North Central Kansas League
(2-4-2010)
13. Modify Rule 30, Seasons of Activities, Section
2, Article 1, to read as follows:
Art. 6: No school-organized spring or summer practice or
school-organized summer camps, shall be permitted. (See
Rule 20-1-1e, Awards.)
a. A coach may organize and administer a one-week (per
sport) camp for his/her players only, provided the following
guidelines are met:
(1) The school shall not be involved other than to approve
the use of facilities, dates and to be assured by the
coach there will be no violations of KSHSAA rules and/
or regulations.
(2) It shall be conducted following the conclusion of the
second semester Saturday before Memorial Day and before
Sunday of Standardized Calendar Week #3.
(3) Member schools, the coaches and coach aides they
employ, may not conduct contact football camps. (See
Rule 10-1-6 (c), Qualifications of Coaches and Rule
35-1-5, Football.)
Source of Recommendation: Executive Board (1-14-2010)
14. Modify Rule 30, Seasons of Activities, Section
1, Article 6(4), to read as follows:
Art. 6: No school-organized spring or summer practice or
school-organized summer camps, shall be permitted. (See
Rule 20-1-1e, Awards.)
a. A coach may organize and administer a one-week (per
sport) camp for his/her players only, provided the following
guidelines are met:
(1) The school shall not be involved other than to approve
the use of facilities, dates and to be assured by the
coach there will be no violations of KSHSAA rules and/
or regulations.
(2) It shall be conducted following the conclusion of the
second and before Sunday of Standardized Calendar
Week #3. (Subject to change per previous agenda item.)
(3) Member schools, the coaches and coach aides they
employ, may not conduct contact football camps. (See
Rule 10-1-6 (c), Qualifications of Coaches and Rule
35-1-5, Football.)
(4) School uniforms or player equipment may not be
used. Exception: Use of school owned football helmets at
the school coach’s non-contact, one week camp, is permitted.
If school facilities (gymnasium, fields, balls, bats,
etc.) are used, the coach must lease them per board of
education policy.
Source of Recommendation: Centennial League (12-1-2009)
15. Elect Executive Board Members from the Board
of Directors per Bylaw Article V.
Sec. 2: Board of Director members shall elect Executive Board
members at their spring meeting in the categories listed,
to two-year terms. Members in each category shall elect
their own representative. Board of Directors organizational
members are eligible for election in their school’s
respective category.
a. Classes 6A, 4A, 2A, in even years 3
b. Classes 5A, 3A, 1A in odd years 3
c. Middle/Junior High Schools in even years 1
d. Board of Education in odd years 1
e. State Board of Education in even years 1
TOTAL 9
Vacancies in the above categories shall be elected by their
respective representatives within sixty (60) days after
notice of such vacancy. They shall fulfill the unexpired
term of that position.
Sec. 3: After the nine category representatives have been
elected, where necessary, at-large representatives shall
also be elected by the entire Board of Directors from its
membership to fill the following voids:
a. If available, both genders shall be represented.
b. If available, a minority member (e.g. Native American
or Alaska Native; African-American; Asian or Pacific
Islanders; or Hispanic) shall be represented.
c. If available, a superintendent shall be represented.
d. Geographically, each congressional district shall be
represented.
At-large representatives shall serve one-year terms.
The above creates an Executive Board of nine (9) to fourteen
(14) members.
In filling vacancies in Sec. 3 on the Executive Board, all
Board of Director members shall select a qualified member
from the Board of Directors to fill the vacancy not more
than sixty (60) days after notice of such vacancy. Each
appointee to fill a vacancy shall hold office until the next
regular election date when a successor shall be elected.
4 April Board Agenda
CLASS 6A
(2-YEAR TERM)
Ath. Dir. Ron Commons, Lawrence
Ath. Dir. Bill Faflick, Wichita USD 259
Robert Gonzales, Manhattan
Ath. Dir. Steve Harms, Overland Park – Blue Valley Northwest
Ath. Dir. Michelle Kuhns, Wichita – South
Prin. Tony Lake, Overland Park – Blue Valley West
Ath. Dir. Penny Lane, Topeka – Washburn Rural
Prin. Cara Ledy, Wichita – South
Asst. Prin. Christina Lentz, Leavenworth
Prin. James Mireles, Garden City
Prin. Gwen Poss, Olathe – Northwest
Prin. Myron Regier, Wichita – Haysville Campus
Ath. Dir. Bill Stiegemeier, Shawnee Mission – South
Prin. Ken Thiessen, Wichita – East
CLASS 4A
(2-YEAR TERM)
Prin. Mike Adams, Clay Center Community
Prin. Blaise Bauer, Girard
Prin. Steve Blankenship, Pratt
Prin. J.B. Elliott, Perry – Lecompton
Prin. Tracy Giddens, Haven
Prin. David Morford, DeSoto
Prin. Sherry Reeves, Basehor – Linwood
Joyce Siniard, Kingman
Ath. Dir. Bobby Taul, Topeka – Hayden
Prin. Kent Wire, Chanute
CLASS 2A
(2-YEAR TERM)
Prin. Larry Anderson, Alma – Wabaunsee
Prin. Doug Beisel, Oskaloosa
Prin. Patrick McKernan, Seneca – Nemaha Valley
Prin. Alan Stein, Hill City
Prin. Galen Unruh, Elbing – Berean Academy
Supt. Bill Walker, Mankato – Rock Hills
Prin. Bob Warkentine, Solomon
Prin. Rod Wittmer, Oswego
Prin. Paul Zuzelski, Syracuse
MIDDLE/JUNIOR HIGH
(2-YEAR TERM)
Prin. Tavis Desormiers, WaKeeney
Prin. Bruce Krase, Whitewater – Remington
Prin. Mitch Lubin, Wellsville
Prin. J.D. Nelson, Leavenworth – Warren
Prin. Keith Pauly, Clearwater
Prin. Richard Proffitt, Eudora
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
(2-YEAR TERM – Elected by Kansas State
Board of Education)
This position is filled by action of the Kansas State Board
of Education. The representative must be a member of the
Kansas State Board of Education.
16. Approve proposed meeting dates for the 2010-
11 school year as follows:
Fall:
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Spring:
Friday, April 29, 2011
Saturday, April 30, 2011
17. Recognitions & Closing Announcements –
President & Executive Director
18. 2010-11 Executive Board – Organizational
meeting
(15 minutes following adjournment

I think 321A would still be together as one class in wrestling?