The NCAA News - News and FeaturesFebruary 23, 1998
Certification committee develops assumptions for second cycle
The Division I Committee on Athletics Certification has developed a set of "presumptive conclusions" about the second cycle of the Division I athletics certification process.
The conclusions were first discussed at the committee's November 11 meeting and were reviewed most recently February 3 by the committee's executive subcommittee.
The list of conclusions is not necessarily final and some modification is possible before the second cycle begins in 1999.
Here are the six "presumptive conclusions" reached so far:
The committee will continue to assume that every school is "certified" until there is evidence presented to the contrary (that is, "innocent until proven guilty").
The committee will continue to use "corrective actions," "conditions" and "strategies for improvement" to help schools become certified.
The membership has made changes for the second cycle in response to evolving standards (for example, through modifications in the operating principles), and the committee's expectation is that schools would have made progress in the four certification areas from the first cycle.
A school will be evaluated mainly on information from its second-cycle self-study, with the exception of the school's implementation/progress on required actions from the certification committee's first-cycle decision and those plans for improvement adopted by the school in the first cycle that are directly related to the operating principles. Additionally, institutions will be asked to report on any changes that may have resulted from the implementation of the committee's suggestions from the first cycle.
As a part of the committee's evaluation of the gender-equity and minority-issues areas, the committee will use, in its deliberations and in the training of peer reviewers, a checklist of Title IX/equity areas and a similar document representing minority-issues areas to determine whether an institution has (1) thoroughly studied itself in the two areas and described how it studied each area, (2) compiled complete data demonstrating its current status/commitment, and (3) established a complete plan for making or maintaining progress with its gender-equity and minority-opportunities positions. (It is critical to note that the committee will not be evaluating, nor training, peer reviewers to evaluate whether an institution is in legal compliance with Title IX/equity areas; rather, it and peer reviewers will be evaluating the institution in terms of whether the school has thoroughly addressed its standing in each Title IX/equity area.)
If circumstances change substantially (for example, due to modifications in NCAA or federal legislation), the committee will consider making changes during the second cycle, as opposed to holding all substantive changes to the third cycle.
|
