National Collegiate Athletic Association

The NCAA News - News and Features

December 22, 1997

Cabinet reviews new approach on core courses

Division I group also looks at Prop 62, basketball recruiting and new legislation

The Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet recently assessed alternative core-course review policies that could go into effect after the first of the year.

The cabinet, which met December 10-11 in Phoenix, heard reports from its six subcommittees, including the update on core-course review from the Subcommittee on Initial-Eligibility Issues. The cabinet had been asked in August by the Division I Board of Directors to develop implementation plans for a significantly greater involvement of high schools in the review process.

Under the plan, high-school principals annually would review the list of approved core courses for their high schools, delete any that they believe no longer meet the criteria and indicate additions that do meet the NCAA standards. Although there has been no change in the standards, representatives of various national councils of high-school teachers in specific disciplines have been working with the subcommittee to fine-tune the criteria in each subject area.

In a change from previous years, those criteria will be shared with high schools so counselors and principals can evaluate their curriculums and adjust their list of core courses accordingly. Previously denied courses, courses submitted in connection with a specific student-athlete or courses with titles that typically do not meet the 75 percent instructional content criteria will trigger the need for additional review by the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse.

The Division I Board of Directors is expected to decide on implementation of the proposed changes at its January 1998 meeting in connection with the NCAA Convention.

Basketball recruiting

The cabinet also received an update from its Subcommittee on Recruiting regarding a recruiting model for Division I men's basketball. A previously proposed model that would have included regional camps conducted by USA Basketball was revised based on that organization's decision to conduct a "festival" for a smaller number of athletes than would be practical for Division I men's basketball purposes.

The new model was initially developed by the National Association of Basketball Coaches. Under the model, college coaching staffs would be restricted to evaluating during the academic year only activities that are approved, sanctioned, sponsored or conducted by the applicable state high-school federation, the National Federation of State High School Associations or the National Junior College Athletic Association.

In addition, the July evaluation period would be reduced from 23 days to 14 days starting in 1999, divided into two equal segments with a three-day break period to permit college coaches to return to campus. Evaluation periods would be added in the months of October, April and May to allow coaches to evaluate prospects only at basketball activities approved as indicated above. The unused "person days" from July would be added to the current 40 permissible days during the academic year.

The contact period would be lengthened during the academic year from September 5 to October 5, with 18 days designated during that period for contact. There are telephone restrictions also imposed in the new model, as well. Coaching staff members could not have telephone contact with individuals who are involved in nonscholastic basketball activities with prospective student-athletes between the dates of April 1 and August 1.

Goals of the model include an increased role in the recruiting pro-
cess for high-school and junior col-
lege coaches; increased impact of
state high-school associations, the NFSHSA and the NJCAA in the recruiting process; a reduced number of consecutive days college coaches must be on the road during the July evaluation period; and a continued opportunity for all the mid- and lower-Division I basketball programs to evaluate a significant number of prospects.

Proposal No. 62

The recruiting subcommittee also discussed 1997 NCAA Convention Proposal No. 62, which would permit student-athletes to work during the academic year, and recommendations from a Division I Management Council ad hoc subcommittee studying the implementation of Prop 62. The recruiting subcommittee noted that in its view any limit above a full grant-in-aid would constitute a recruiting advantage but that a $2,000 cap would not create a significant advantage.

The cabinet agreed that the Division I Financial Aid Committee should also review the recommendations of the Management Council subcommittee and report their observations to the Management Council in January.

In other action related to Prop 62, the cabinet:

  • Agreed to ask for a review by the Division I Management Council as to whether the first $2,000 of earnings should count toward an institution's scholarship limits if the student-athlete is employed in the athletics department.

  • Agreed to seek a clarification on whether the $2,000 counts toward an institution's minimum in meeting division membership criteria.

  • Agreed to recommend study to determine the impact on institutional and federal calculations of financial need when the difference between the cost of attendance and a full grant-in-aid is less than $2,000.

    Legislation

    The cabinet also approved legislative amendments to:

  • Bylaw 14.2.1.5.1 to modify the criteria to permit student-athletes to receive an extension of the five-year period in instances when a student-athlete was unable to participate in intercollegiate athletics as a result of the student-athlete's participation in one of the indicated training activities.

  • Bylaw 15.3.4 to permit institutions to cancel or gradate athletically related financial aid in circumstances where the student-athlete misses an excessive number of classes.

  • Bylaws 15.01.6, 15.1.1 and 15.3.1.4 to permit an institution to continue to provide financial aid for the remainder of the term of the award to a student-athlete who completes eligibility in a sport and is under contract to or receiving compensation from a professional sports organization as specified.

    In accordance with Association bylaws, the proposed changes will be published within 30 days for the information of the membership and to solicit the membership's review and comment before initial review by the Management Council.

    Initial-eligibility issues

    In other actions, the Subcommittee on Initial-Eligibility Issues reported to the cabinet that it would request that a representative of the Office for Civil Rights in the U.S. Department of Justice meet with the subcommittee in February to discuss the current NCAA prohibition against using English as Second Language courses as English core courses. OCR has asked the Association to reconsider the blanket prohibition against ESL courses.

    In addition, the subcommittee also declined to support any increase in student fees for registering with the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse.