National Collegiate Athletic Association

The NCAA News - News and Features

January 26, 1998

Study: Academic performance up, eligibility down

Three new research reports based on data from the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse show an increase in academic performance for prospective student-athletes, along with an increase in the percentage of prospective Division I and II student-athletes who are not academically eligible to compete.

The reports, which will be mailed to the membership later this month, compare data from the 1996 group of prospective student-athletes (PSAs) with data from the 1995 group of PSAs.

"This is an important set of studies because it compares data from the last group of student-athletes who entered Division I institutions under the Proposition 48 standards with the first group that entered under the new, stricter standards of Proposition 16," said Todd A. Petr, NCAA director of research.

All of the reports -- 97-02, 97-03 and 97-04 -- focus on the incoming preparation levels of PSAs, measured by their high-school core grade-point averages and test scores, and on the eligibility status of PSAs as determined by the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse (IEC).

This article summarizes findings from Reports 97-02 and 97-03; the February 2 issue of The NCAA News will summarize findings from Report 97-04.

Report 97-02 analyzes data from six key student-athlete groups from within the clearinghouse database. Those groups include: (1) the overall group of PSAs that applied to the clearinghouse in 1995 and 1996; (2) the group of PSAs who received a final certification from the clearinghouse (meaning that all required paperwork has been completed and the eligibility of the PSA has been determined); (3) the subset of the previous group that appeared on an Institutional Request List (IRL) from any NCAA institution; (4) the subset that appeared on an IRL from any Division I institution; (5) the subset of the fourth group that appeared on a final IRL from a Division I institution, and (6) the subset that appeared on a final IRL from a Division I institution and was declared eligible for competition by the clearinghouse.

The report presents information related to the high-school academic performances for those six groups, as well as the potential impact of selection effects. A few basic results were:

  • The 1996 PSA cohort was about the same size as the 1995 PSA cohort (N > 100,000), which means that use of the IEC by students and colleges continues to be widespread. Also, the groups of PSAs that were recruited by Division I using the IRL mechanism seem to be similar in 1995 and 1996, at least in size and academic backgrounds.

  • The data continue to show trends in increasing academic performance as included groups are subject to additional selection criteria. The recruited PSAs presented grades and test scores that were well above the national averages for college-bound seniors in 1995-96. Petr noted that the scores accompanying this article are optimal scores and are likely to be inflated to some degree. For instance, the grade-point average for prospective student-athletes accounts for only the 13 core courses with the highest grades.

    The number and percentage of PSAs with IRLs in Division I or II who have been declared ineligible for any reason increased from 1995 to 1996. In 1995, 7.8 percent of PSAs on IRLs were ineligible; in 1996 that figure increased to 14.9 percent. The percentage of PSAs with IRLs in Division I who were declared ineligible for any reason increased from 6.3 percent in 1995 to 10.6 percent in 1996.

    Several different reasons may explain those outcomes, Petr said.

    The addition of the sliding scale in 1996 may have led to a higher academic profile for those PSAs declared eligible, but there also was a higher number of PSAs who did not meet the minimum standards for eligibility. The number of core courses attempted by all groups was higher in 1996 than in 1995.

    Report 97-03 focuses on those PSAs who appeared on a Division I IRL at some point in the recruiting process. In that report, those PSAs are divided into three sports-group categories: females, males in Olympic sports and males in revenue sports (football and basketball).

    Significant findings from that study were:

  • Female recruits are increasing in number on Division I IRLs. As a group, females showed relatively high levels of academic performance, especially on high-school grades, number of core courses taken and, to a lesser degree, on SAT and ACT tests. A relatively small but increasing proportion of those females were declared ineligible (4.0 percent in 1995, 6.3 percent in 1996).

  • Male PSAs in Olympic sports also showed relatively high levels of academic performance, especially on SAT and ACT test scores. A somewhat larger and increasing proportion of that group were declared ineligible (5.9 percent in 1995, 9.8 percent in 1996).

  • Male PSAs in revenue sports (basketball and football) showed the lowest high-school academic performance of the three groups studied. While the average academic performance was not low by national standards, the subgroup had the largest number (1,104 in 1995, 1,728 in 1996) and percentage (10.5 percent in 1995, 17.2 percent in 1996) of ineligible recruits.

  • In all groups, the numbers and percentages of ineligible Division I recruits increased from 1995 to 1996 even though the total numbers of Division I recruits were similar in each year.

  • No single factor was determined to be responsible for the trends in academic performances or eligibility decisions, but the new test/GPA index requirements were certainly responsible for some of the increased number of ineligibility declarations, Petr said.

    He said a key question is to what degree the differences are due to changes in the student academic preparation, as opposed to selection effects relating to the increased 1996 initial-eligibility requirements.

    "These data are simply descriptive, and have some limitations," Petr noted. "We have no measures of academic outcomes, and we are not able to measure the number of individuals who simply chose not to apply to the clearinghouse because they did not believe that they would qualify.

    "Obviously, making causal statements from these data is tricky. However, there are other studies underway that we hope will remedy some of these limitations. We view the IEC data as an excellent descriptive baseline from which to launch further research."