The NCAA News - News and FeaturesApril 28, 1997
Council looks at top issues in Division I
Actions relate to work, initial-eligibility processes
The NCAA Council took several actions at its April 14-15 meeting to help Division I member institutions comply with the provisions of 1997 Convention Proposal No. 62.
That legislation permits Division I student-athletes to earn up to the cost of attendance through employment during the academic year.
Acting on a recommendation from the NCAA Division I Steering Committee, the Council modified a previous interpretation to indicate that earnings received by a recruited student-athlete for employment in the athletics department or employment earnings received by any student-athlete whose employment was arranged by athletics interests should be considered institutional aid up to the value of a full grant.
The Council had issued an interpretation at its pre-Convention meeting that such aid would not be considered institutional financial aid and thus would not be counted in the institution's team limits in the applicable sport. The interpretation -- which was designed to avoid possible complications in calculating an institution's numbers of grants-in-aid that could occur as a result of increased involvement by athletics representatives -- created different standards for how employment earnings would be counted during a student-athlete's initial academic year in residence and how they would be counted afterward (if the employment occurred in the athletics department or was arranged by athletics interests).
The Council at its recent meeting concluded that the issue of potential abuse by an institution's athletics boosters is addressed through the requirement of a signed statement from the student-athlete acknowledging that the work is actually performed and that the student-athlete has not used his or her athletics ability to acquire money beyond the going rate. The Council agreed that the notice requirement should be streamlined.
Accordingly, the Council, again acting on a recommendation from the Division I Steering Committee, used its authority to adopt intent-based legislation to specify that compensation for employment permitted under Proposal No. 62 may not be based on the athlete's athletics ability or reputation. The intent-based legislation amends Bylaw 15.2.6.1.1 (a), which stated that the student-athlete must provide a signed statement that he or she was not hired based on his or her athletics reputation.
Also, the Council used intent-based legislation to specify that athletes would be required to provide a signed statement, rather than an affidavit, affirming that they are complying with the legislation. An affidavit technically must be notarized, a standard that exceeds the intent of the new legislation.
In a related matter, the NCAA Committee on Financial Aid and Amateurism advised the Division I Steering Committee that it currently is collecting cost-of-attendance data from Division I conferences as part of a study to determine if any limitations on the definition of cost-of-attendance should be adopted to minimize possible recruiting advantages for certain institutions. The steering committee recommended that the study be given priority treatment and forwarded to the new Division I governance structure for review and action.
Other actions
The Council also took action on several recommendations related to the initial-eligibility process. The proposals came from the NCAA Academic Requirements Committee and the Special Committee to Oversee Implementation of the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse.
Using either its authority to adopt noncontroversial legislation or its authority to make legislation conform to intent, the Council:
Agreed to permit the clearinghouse to assign the lowest passing grade that a high school can assign for a pass/fail course, as opposed to the lowest grade provided for any course at the high school.
Modified the provisions of 1997 Convention Proposal No. 93 to specify that in order to receive an early-admissions waiver, the only core-course requirement a student may lack is the fourth year of English.
Established criteria in Division I for student-athletes who fail to meet the initial-eligibility standards but whose overall academic records clearly demonstrate that a waiver is warranted. The waiver criteria will cover students (1) who are deficient in one unit or less in the area of English only, (2) who present an overall grade-point average of at least 3.300 in their core curriculum and (3) who score in the 70th percentile on the verbal subscore of the SAT (approximately 560) or on the English subscore of the ACT (approximately 23).
Agreed that if the status of a high-school core course changes from acceptable to nonacceptable after a student has taken the course, the student still would be entitled to use the course for the purpose of meeting initial-eligibility standards. In such situations, the clearinghouse would notify the high school that for subsequent classes, the course will not be considered acceptable for meeting NCAA initial-eligibility standards.
In a related action, the Council referred to the Division I Academic/ Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet the question of providing a waiver of the fourth year of English for Division I student-athletes.
The Council also approved a recommendation from the Academic Requirements Committee clarifying the conditions under which a satisfactory-progress waiver request may be resubmitted to the committee's subcommittee on waiver appeals. Resubmissions are permitted if "new information" is provided. The Council approved the following language to clarify the term "new information": "The subcommittee will only review the same case more than once if the institution submits new information related to the student-athlete's academic and/or institutional records. New information is limited to information that was unknown at the time the original appeal was filed."
Other highlights
Council
April 14-15/Tucson, Arizona
Declined to more specifically define the "extraordinary or extreme hardship" criteria related to five-year rule waivers as set forth in Bylaw 30.6.1, and forwarded to the appropriate bodies in the new governance structure a request that they examine various appeals processes to see that they are made as consistent as possible.
Noted a concern expressed by the Special Committee to Oversee Implementation of the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse that a number of Division I institutions still are not linked via modem to the clearinghouse, even though they were required through legislation to be on-line as of January 1.
Approved a recommendation to expand the Division I Initial-Eligibility Committee to 19 people in an effort to make more efficient the processing of waiver requests beginning with the 1997-98 academic year. The committee will be divided into five subcommittees that will be responsible for the following areas: learning disabilities, home-school issues, foreign student issues, core-course issues and transcript-change issues. The Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet will select the new committee members at its first meeting.
Approved for Division I a request from the Council Subcommittee on Initial-Eligibility Waivers to add the initial-eligibility waiver appeals process into the 1997-98 NCAA Manual. The following language was approved: "After the Initial-Eligibility Committee has acted on an initial-eligibility matter, the involved institution may appeal the decision to the (Academics/Eligibility/Compliance) Cabinet. The cabinet determination shall be final, binding and conclusive and shall not be subject to further review by the Management Council or any other authority." In Division II, the matter was forwarded to the Transition Management Council.
Forwarded to the Division I Strategic Planning Cabinet a recommendation that the NCAA Professional Sports Liaison Committee remain a Division I standing committee in the new structure, with general support for the concerns raised by the committee.
Approved recommendations from the NCAA Committee on Women's Athletics to establish criteria for when to remove a sport from the list of emerging sports (either when the sport becomes an NCAA championship sport or when 10 years have passed without a championship being established in the emerging sport) and removed immediately the sport of women's rowing from the list of emerging sports.
Supported a recommendation for approximately $175,000 to $250,000 in funding for the NCAA to join with the Fund for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education in providing grants to member institutions to develop model programs that deal with the issue of student-athlete violence. The NCAA Executive Committee in the new structure would have to approve such funding.
Reacting to requests from the Big South Conference and the University of Denver, decided that an institution that is in the second year of the two-year reclassification period shall be counted by its opponents as a member of the division to which it is moving.
Declined to support a request from the NCAA Student-Athlete Advisory Committee that current Division I members of the Association-wide SAAC be reappointed to the new Division I SAAC. The Council also expressed concern about a provision that permits student-athletes to continue serving on the SAAC for two years after their graduation, particularly if they do not remain full-time students at the institution at which they competed.
Issued an interpretation that student-athletes can participate in off-campus presentations about their institutions, provided that they represent the admissions department, that no expenses are paid by the institution, that the activity is not directed by a coach, that the presentation is directed at all prospective students (not just student-athletes) and that the comments pertain to the institution in general.
Approved noncontroversial legislation that specifies that student-athletes participating in women's rowing are subject to the five-year/10-semester rule beginning with the 1997-98 academic year. Currently enrolled rowing student-athletes who would be adversely affected by the application of the five-year rule will be "grandparented." (Legislation relating to rowing's former status as an emerging sport currently could permit a student-athlete to compete four years on a club team or four years in another varsity sport and then compete an additional four years as a member of the varsity rowing team.)
Upheld the decision of the NCAA Committee on Athletics Certification not to certify the University of Texas, Pan American.
Declined to adopt noncontroversial legislation that would permit institutions to use a sports psychologist without counting the psychologist against the coaching-staff limitations in the involved sport.
Denied a request by the University of Idaho to modify current legislation (20.9.6.2.1 and/or 30.9.2) to permit a Division I-AA member institution to be counted by its opponents as a Division I-A member if the Division I-AA member has elected to be governed by Division I-A legislation as permitted in 20.6.1.1.
|
