All-Star Starting A Discussion: The Safety Of Spring Floor Vs... Well.. Anything Else

[coachbd]

Someone sent me a study that says building accounts for 60% of the injuries in all cheerleading (so gymnastics for 40%... which makes sense because the vast majority of the country cannot attempt a tumbling skill past level 3 but can attempt stunting skills up to level 6 in high school).

Would you all be interested in reading it?

Yes please! :)

 

[cheersafety]

The whole course is about risk management ("AACCA has partnered with the National Federation of State High School Association's Coaches Education Program to produce an outstanding risk management course for spirit coaches from school to all-star, youth to college." http://aacca.org/content.aspx?item=News/online-cheer-safety-course.xml). I don't want to get in trouble for copying parts of the course, but unit titles include Safety Awareness and Legal Liability, Spotting, Performer Readiness, and Skill Progressions (among other topics). In the unit on Skill Progressions, under the "Resources" tab, there is a lengthy article detailing landing position, tumbling, and partner stunt progressions as well as a partner stunt progression checklist. Is that what you're looking for?

I have read the manual and seen the course. What I am asking for is a list like USAG has for what skill has to be taught first, second, third, ect which I haven't come across yet and thought maybe someone else has.

 

[SarahS]

I have read the manual and seen the course. What I am asking for is a list like USAG has for what skill has to be taught first, second, third, ect which I haven't come across yet and thought maybe someone else has.

The article I mentioned has descriptions of how to do each skill in progression; it isn't in list format, but that could easily be accomplished by writing down each skill in order. I'm not sure what you're getting at. Are you saying that there should be a mandatory order for skill progression? Like, it should say somewhere in the AACCA manual that you are "required" to teach these skills in this order, rather than just presenting the skills in order and mentioning repeatedly that mastery of basic skills should be accomplished before attempting more difficult skills?

 

[cheersafety]

The article I mentioned has descriptions of how to do each skill in progression; it isn't in list format, but that could easily be accomplished by writing down each skill in order. I'm not sure what you're getting at. Are you saying that there should be a mandatory order for skill progression? Like, it should say somewhere in the AACCA manual that you are "required" to teach these skills in this order, rather than just presenting the skills in order and mentioning repeatedly that mastery of basic skills should be accomplished before attempting more difficult skills?

Yes, I am looking for the progressions listed. I am not saying that it does not say to follow progressions or that examples of different levels are not given but where is the list of progressions for cheerleading, the athletic activity?

 

[The_cheer_obsessed]

I don't think it's safe for cheerleaders to be tumbling on a gym floor (like a basketball gym floor) or a hard floor (like high school) I think the spring floor is the way to go!

 

[SarahS]

Yes, I am looking for the progressions listed. I am not saying that it does not say to follow progressions or that examples of different levels are not given but where is the list of progressions for cheerleading, the athletic activity?

I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to get at by highlighting the fact that AACCA has argued that cheerleading is an athletic activity, rather than a sport. I've read the position paper; the way high school cheerleading is set up today in most states, it *isn't* a sport by Title IX definition. Eh, I'm not sure how that matters? But, as for your question of the list of progressions, just take the skills in the article and list them in order. I'd do it, but I'm not sure where it would cross the line of giving too much of the copy-written material away, and I'd rather err on the conservative side. There's definitely an order of skills listed in progression... I guess it just isn't in the list format you'd like? Or do you have a deeper issue with AACCA being used as a determinant of "qualification" for high school coaches? If so, I'm okay with that idea - that's why I asked what else can be used to help "qualify" high school coaches.

 

[cheersafety]

I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to get at by highlighting the fact that AACCA has argued that cheerleading is an athletic activity, rather than a sport. I've read the position paper; the way high school cheerleading is set up today in most states, it *isn't* a sport by Title IX definition. Eh, I'm not sure how that matters? But, as for your question of the list of progressions, just take the skills in the article and list them in order. I'd do it, but I'm not sure where it would cross the line of giving too much of the copy-written material away, and I'd rather err on the conservative side. There's definitely an order of skills listed in progression... I guess it just isn't in the list format you'd like? Or do you have a deeper issue with AACCA being used as a determinant of "qualification" for high school coaches? If so, I'm okay with that idea - that's why I asked what else can be used to help "qualify" high school coaches.

Just asked for a list.

 

[pinksparklybow]

May I ask where you got your statistics for your statement that "the VAST majority [of high school coaches] are not [qualified]"? I was not able to find the total number of AACCA-certified coaches online, but I searched my last name (Smith) and found that there are 172 AACCA-certified Coach Smiths in the US. I would guess (very unscientifically, based on that one name) that there are thousands of AACCA-certified coaches in the US. If AACCA certification is not enough to be "qualified," then what is? NYSCA? NCSSE? All of the above? More? (Did you read my question about allowing high school coaches to be certified under USASF? What do you think of that?) What resources exist for high school coaches to become "qualified"? By shifting the argument from "we need to make sure that cheerleading is performed on a suitable surface" to "we need to make sure that cheerleading is performed under a qualified coach" you're left in a bit of a quandary - what or who determines qualification? I understand that this is in the all star forum, but there's no need to be so all-star-centric that you alienate "the VAST majority" of the audience to which you should be making your argument. (And I'm on your side!! I agree with many suggestions you've offered! But, man, it is tough to be supportive when I and my peers are very obviously second-class in your estimation.)

The thrust of my argument is this: because there is no national governing body for high school cheerleading with any real power (whereas there is USASF for all star cheer, and arguments could be made about its "power," I'm sure, but at least there are standardized rules at competitions and standardized certifications for coaches recognized across the country that indicate, at least ostensibly, a coach's competence) you will *always* be able to say that high school coaches are "unqualified" for one reason or another. That doesn't get to the heart of the problem: making sure that coaches are educated up to a particular standard (wherein they'd recognize, for instance, what skills can safely be performed on each type of surface they may encounter), making sure that parents are aware of the standards and expect their school teams to adhere to them, and making sure that there are no incentives for violating the standards - these appear to be the same kind of goals the USASF is trying to achieve in the all-star cheer world. How can we work toward achieving these aims in the high school cheerleading realm?

I believe when I was researching on Friday I saw 4 coaches listed as AACCA certified in Ohio. That is a bare minimum compared to the number of schools in the state.

 

[SarahS]

I believe when I was researching on Friday I saw 4 coaches listed as AACCA certified in Ohio. That is a bare minimum compared to the number of schools in the state.

I just looked up Ohio in the AACCA certified coach search - there are 346 coaches currently listed. That is probably far fewer than the total number of high school coaches in the state (and you don't have to be a high school coach to be AACCA certified, so there are probably all star and rec coaches included in that number), but certainly more than four (and, as far as I can tell, AACCA certification isn't required by the Ohio Board of Education to be a cheer coach... wouldn't that requirement incentivize coach education?) But the problem remains - does AACCA certification actually mean anything, in the way of qualifying coaches? Is it seen by the larger cheer industry as, well, kind of pointless? Useless? Would a certification process similar to USASF's add legitimacy to high school coaching credentials? Would that actually make the athletes safer, or would it just give us high school coaches some degree of street cred? What would really work to make sure that high school coaches are educated to ensure that athletes perform skills safely, in a safe progression and on safe surfaces?

 

[King]

I just looked up Ohio in the AACCA certified coach search - there are 346 coaches currently listed. That is probably far fewer than the total number of high school coaches in the state (and you don't have to be a high school coach to be AACCA certified, so there are probably all star and rec coaches included in that number), but certainly more than four (and, as far as I can tell, AACCA certification isn't required by the Ohio Board of Education to be a cheer coach... wouldn't that requirement incentivize coach education?) But the problem remains - does AACCA certification actually mean anything, in the way of qualifying coaches? Is it seen by the larger cheer industry as, well, kind of pointless? Useless? Would a certification process similar to USASF's add legitimacy to high school coaching credentials? Would that actually make the athletes safer, or would it just give us high school coaches some degree of street cred? What would really work to make sure that high school coaches are educated to ensure that athletes perform skills safely, in a safe progression and on safe surfaces?

Going off an earlier posts, you gotta understand that certification is a way to 'cover your butt'. When you are certified you can point to something and say 'I am certified and followed procedure'. But that does not mean you know how to coach or know what you are doing. Because the high school community is not that organized, does not have a standardized governing body that rules everything, and in general is years behind all-star I think the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Everything lowered to level 3. Once stuff is in place, once everything is setup the rules can look at to be opened up as everyone becomes more educated.

 

[SarahS]

Going off an earlier posts, you gotta understand that certification is a way to 'cover your butt'. When you are certified you can point to something and say 'I am certified and followed procedure'. But that does not mean you know how to coach or know what you are doing. Because the high school community is not that organized, does not have a standardized governing body that rules everything, and in general is years behind all-star I think the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Everything lowered to level 3. Once stuff is in place, once everything is setup the rules can look at to be opened up as everyone becomes more educated.

Totally agree... although I'd like to be able to twist out of single leg stunts and I'd like the no/very few inversions of HS rules to still apply, lol. The problem remains, though - with no national governing body, who is going to enforce these rules?

 

[King]

Totally agree... although I'd like to be able to twist out of single leg stunts and I'd like the no/very few inversions of HS rules to still apply, lol. The problem remains, though - with no national governing body, who is going to enforce these rules?

No one. High schools STILL do level 6 and level 7 skills (level 7 being illegal no matter where you are). And the problem with rules that aren't inline with all-star is you don't have consistency. By limiting to level 3 you are lowering the barrier to entry for lots of schools, it limits the craziness they can do, and should actually increase the ability for high schools across America to safely compete. I know there are teams and coaches that would suffer, and it sucks! I get it. But it's just like that all-star coach who argues that we shouldn't raise the age for senior teams that go to worlds because they have this ONE girl that HAS to be able to go to worlds or she will leave their gym so they sacrifice everything for this one kid and end up in a downward spiral... we have to focus on the whole rather than the individual successful parts.

 

[SarahS]

No one. High schools STILL do level 6 and level 7 skills (level 7 being illegal no matter where you are). And the problem with rules that aren't inline with all-star is you don't have consistency. By limiting to level 3 you are lowering the barrier to entry for lots of schools, it limits the craziness they can do, and should actually increase the ability for high schools across America to safely compete. I know there are teams and coaches that would suffer, and it sucks! I get it. But it's just like that all-star coach who argues that we shouldn't raise the age for senior teams that go to worlds because they have this ONE girl that HAS to be able to go to worlds or she will leave their gym so they sacrifice everything for this one kid and end up in a downward spiral... we have to focus on the whole rather than the individual successful parts.

So, since a "top-down" approach is unlikely to work, since there is no real overarching governing body, would a "bottom-up" strategy be more effective? As in, what if we lobbied competition companies to only allow level 3 skills from school teams at competitions? That would certainly remove at least *some* incentive to throw redonkulous skills that teams and coaches aren't prepared for. Would competition companies be willing to take this step?

 

[pinksparklybow]

So, since a "top-down" approach is unlikely to work, since there is no real overarching governing body, would a "bottom-up" strategy be more effective? As in, what if we lobbied competition companies to only allow level 3 skills from school teams at competitions? That would certainly remove at least *some* incentive to throw redonkulous skills that teams and coaches aren't prepared for. Would competition companies be willing to take this step?

Sarah thanks for correcting me on the numbers, I appreciate you double checking that. There are several main hurdles I've identified, the number one being administration/you can't enforce this type of regulation. Admins at schools aren't going to want to pay for any type of certifications nor are they likely to care about it in general. I doubt comp companies would take this step as it's going to limit their participation and they will get negative feedback from kids/parents/coaches. (ie Suzy does level 4 skills at her gym, why not here, etc.....especially from kids who take a year off of all star to do school cheer only). I've thought about it and wondered if the best way to "enforce" something like this is to create a demand for it. as in...the same way comps became USASF certified...it became a way for gyms to go to "legit" comps. I don't think the demand is going to come from the school admins. I don't think it's going to come from the coaches (too many with a smaller amount who are in the know), so it would have to come from the kids who are applying to these schools or living in these school districts...ie Is your school certified for tumbling/stunting? This also goes down the avenue of the entire reason gymnastics programs were eliminated...too much liability. So the thought is to avoid going THAT far as well. Frankly while I think a bottoms up approach would work more quickly, I think top down would be more effective in the long run. I'd like to reach out to Jim Lord and other leaders in the safety area to see what they've experienced so far, but I haven't had a chance.

 

[yojaehs]

Ok, I'm going to play a bit of devils advocate here. I 100% agree that hard floor is much more dangerous than spring floor HOWEVER, isn't the purpose of training athletes to prepare them for college cheerleading? If that is the case, shouldn't we as coaches teach PROPER hard floor technique to prepare these athletes that will hopefully be continuing on to college cheerleading where hard floor is the only option? I am a HUGE fan of spring floor all the way around but at the same time I'm a realist, I was coaching college when it went from doubles to full and halfs (I still don't understand that logic but whatever that's a different debate) and I know that MAJORITY of schools (high school and college) do not have the financial means to participate on a spring floor. So I ask this, should the all-star community at least attempt to adapt to high school and more importantly college standards? Just curious on opinions