The NCAA News - News and Features

May 25, 1998

Rate of minority hiring level over last two years

BY GARY T. BROWN
STAFF WRITER

A study released by the NCAA Minority Opportunities and Interests Committee reveals little if any significant increase in the hiring of minority coaches or administrators in intercollegiate athletics over the past two years.

The data come from the committee's Two-Year Study of Race Demographics of Member Institutions, which was mailed to presidents, directors of athletics and conference commissioners May 18.

The study shows no change in the percentage of black head coaches of men's teams at member institutions (historically black institutions excluded) from 1995 to 1997. It also reveals a slight decrease in the percentage of black coaches of women's teams.

The percentage of black coaches in men's revenue sports (football and basketball) increased from 8.0 in 1995 to 8.4 in 1997, while the percentage of black coaches in women's basketball decreased from 7.7 to 6.6.

The only notable increase at the administrative level was in the academic advisor position (from 18.2 to 21.1), but decreases existed in the positions of athletics director and associate athletics director.

"The overall percentages are still low," said Stanley D. Johnson, NCAA director of professional development. "There's been no significant increase in coaches or administrators, while the number of minority student-athletes, particularly in revenue sports, remains high."

According to the study, nearly 47 percent of student-athletes participating in men's and women's revenue sports are black.

The study is part of the committee's charge to monitor circumstances surrounding minority enhancement and opportunities for growth for minorities in intercollegiate athletics. The NCAA began collecting annual demographic data in 1990 by requiring member institutions to complete a certification of compliance form that included race and gender information, but in 1995 legislation was passed to eliminate that requirement. The committee then developed an institution staff demographic form, but completion of the form is voluntary.

Because there no longer is a census, the committee decided to use the 1995 data as a baseline and calculate aggregate figures every other year to measure broad changes over time.

The response rate in collecting the 1997 data was more than 95 percent in every member division, and though those numbers are high, the numbers within the report are too low to satisfy the committee.

"The numbers indicate that we have made very little or no progress in a lot of areas," said Charles Whitcomb, committee chair and faculty athletics representative at San Jose State University. "There's still a great concern for advancement for minorities in all areas of athletics -- not just coaching, but also athletics administration. We need to continuously reevaluate the responsibilities of institutions and those responsible parties in terms of hiring."

Change in the process

Whitcomb said the committee has requested more involvement from college and university presidents in the hiring process in order to ensure a more diverse applicant pool. According to Whitcomb, the two-year study supports the need for a dramatic change in the process.

"The document is not designed to scare anybody," he said, "but to illustrate the facts -- to raise the consciousness of those who are hiring and ask whether we've extended the types of efforts that are necessary to be much more inclusive than exclusive of all people.

"I don't want the document to say to people 'You've got to hire minorities' as much as I want the document to say 'What have you done to ensure that you provided access for minorities to be considered for these positions?' "

Whitcomb said that the disparity between who's playing and who's coaching or administrating indicates that perhaps those questions are not being sufficiently answered.

"Let's look at realistically what we're doing," he said. "Look at the conference offices and the college athletics departments. Then look on the fields and the courts. The picture's clear to me. Is there a fair representation? If not, can institutions honestly say they've made every effort to bring in a diverse list of people for consideration?"

Johnson agreed with Whitcomb that the document is not a scare tactic or a way to leverage action. However, he said it is difficult to ignore the facts.

"The numbers are the facts. The committee's not pedaling hypothetical situations here," he said. "The study becomes an instrument for colleges and universities to determine where they're at in the big picture.

"It's also a valuable resource within the NCAA structure. If I'm part of a sports committee or a sport's governing body and I look at this document and see that our sport has only two minority coaches, there's some cause for concern there.

"It's the same at the administrative level. If I'm an athletics director and I'm looking at the assistants and associates within my staff, am I part of the problem or can I be part of the solution?"

Part of the solution

The committee has tried to encourage member institutions to be part of the solution.

Johnson pointed to several programs administered by the committee to enhance minority opportunities on the fields and courts, as well as in coaching and administrative positions.

The committee also is in the process of developing a set of initiatives that include the enhancement of minority women in athletics; professional development for coaches and enhancement opportunities for minority officials; a minority speakers bureau and a recognition program for those institutions making significant strides in minority enhancement; and a career issues program that targets pre-collegiate student-athletes.

But Johnson said that more involvement from people with decision-making authority is necessary to boost the involvement of minorities in coaching and athletics administration. He said that a collaborative effort is needed from athletics directors and presidents.

If such an effort does not evolve, Johnson said, the picture painted by the next two-year study may not be any brighter.

"The question is whether this is a minority issue or an Association issue," he said. "Now, when it becomes the Association's issue, that's when you can make change. That's why we distribute the numbers."

Percentage of Black Administrators at Member Institutions

Two-year Comparison

(Historically Black Institutions Excluded)

1995 -- 1997 -- Change -- Proportion -- Proportion -- Percent -- Percent

Overall

Director of Athletics -- 2.7 -- 2.6 -- -0.1

Associate Director of Athletics -- 6.1 -- 5.1 -- -1.0

Assistant Director of Athletics -- 6.7 -- 7.2 -- +0.5

Senior Woman Administrator -- 3.2 -- 3.9 -- +0.7

Academic Advisor* -- 18.2 -- 21.1 -- +2.9

Overall** -- 5.1 -- 5.8 -- +0.7

*Highest percentage of all administrative categories.

**All athletics administrators, including graduate assistants and interns.

Percentage of Black Administrators at Member Institutions

Two-Year Comparison

Historically Black Institutions Excluded

1995 -- 1997 -- Change -- 1995 -- 1997 -- Change

Proportion -- Proportion -- -- Proportion -- Proportion

(Percent) -- (Percent) -- -- (Percent) -- (Percent)

Overall

Director of Athletics -- 7.5 -- 6.9 -- -0.6 -- 2.7 -- 2.6 -- -0.1

Associate Director of Athletics -- 8.2 -- 6.8 -- -1.4 -- 6.1 -- 5.1 -- -1.0

Assistant Director of Athletics -- 8.5 -- 8.9 -- +0.4 -- 6.7 -- 7.2 -- +0.5

Senior Woman Administrator -- 9.1 -- 9.1 -- n/c -- 3.2 -- 3.9 -- +0.7

Academic Advisor* -- 20.9 -- 24.8 -- +3.9 -- 18.2 -- 21.1 -- +2.9

Overall** -- 8.4 -- 8.5 -- +0.1 -- 5.1 -- 5.8 -- +0.7

Division I Only

Director of Athletics -- 10.0 -- 9.5 -- -0.5 -- 3.7 -- 3.2 -- -0.5

Associate Director of Athletics -- 9.1 -- 7.5 -- -1.6 -- 7.2 -- 6.2 -- -1.0

Assistant Director of Athletics -- 9.5 -- 10.3 -- +0.8 -- 8.0 -- 8.3 -- +0.3

Senior Woman Administrator -- 8.4 -- 11.0 -- +2.6 -- 2.4 -- 3.4 -- +1.0

Academic Advisor* -- 22.8 -- 27.4 -- +4.6 -- 20.5 -- 23.8 -- +3.3

Overall** -- 9.0 -- 10.3 -- +1.3 -- 6.2 -- 7.6 -- +1.4

Division II Only

Director of Athletics -- 10.9 -- 9.4 -- -1.5 -- 2.5 -- 2.5 -- n/c

Associate Director of Athletics -- 9.8 -- 8.0 -- -1.8 -- 4.0 -- 2.4 -- -1.6

Assistant Director of Athletics -- 7.3 -- 8.7 -- +1.4 -- 3.1 -- 5.3 -- +2.2

Senior Woman Administrator -- 17.1 -- 12.2 -- -4.9 -- 5.7 -- 5.2 -- -0.5

Academic Advisor* -- 15.1 -- 14.1 -- -1.0 -- 6.3 -- 4.8 -- -1.5

Overall** -- 11.4 -- 8.8 -- -2.6 -- 3.8 -- 3.1 -- -0.7

Division III Only

Director of Athletics -- 3.4 -- 3.1 -- -0.3 -- 2.1 -- 2.4 -- +0.3

Associate Director of Athletics -- 2.9 -- 3.4 -- +0.5 -- 2.9 -- 2.6 -- -0.3

Assistant Director of Athletics -- 6.1 -- 5.5 -- -0.6 -- 5.6 -- 5.1 -- -0.5

Senior Woman Administrator -- 2.3 -- 3.8 -- +1.5 -- 2.3 -- 3.3 -- +1.0

Academic Advisor* -- 10.5 -- 9.5 -- -1.0 -- 10.5 -- 9.5 -- -1.0

Overall** -- 4.0 -- 3.7 -- -0.3 -- 3.3 -- 3.2 -- -0.1

*Highest percentage of all administrative categories.

**All athletics administrators, including graduate assistants and interns.

Percentage of Black Head Coaches at Member Institutions

Two-Year Comparison

Historically Black Institutions Excluded

1995 -- 1997 -- Change -- 1995 -- 1997 -- Change

Proportion -- Proportion -- -- Proportion -- Proportion

(Percent) -- (Percent) -- -- (Percent) -- (Percent)

Overall

Men's Teams -- 7.6 -- 7.8 -- +0.2 -- 4.2 -- 4.2 -- n/c

Women's Teams -- 7.5 -- 7.3 -- -0.2 -- 4.2 -- 4.1 -- -0.1

Men's Revenue Sports* -- 12.7 -- 13.0 -- +0.3 -- 8.0 -- 8.4 -- +0.4

Women's Revenue Sports** -- 12.2 -- 10.6 -- -1.6 -- 7.7 -- 6.6 -- -1.1

Division I Only

Men's Teams -- 9.3 -- 11.0 -- +1.7 -- 4.9 -- 5.8 -- +0.9

Women's Teams -- 9.7 -- 10.7 -- +1.0 -- 5.3 -- 5.4 -- +0.1

Men's Revenue Sports* -- 17.9 -- 19.3 -- +1.4 -- 12.1 -- 13.3 -- +1.2

Women's Revenue Sports** -- 15.5 -- 14.7 -- -0.8 -- 10.1 -- 8.5 -- -1.6

Division II Only

Men's Teams -- 11.6 -- 9.4 -- -2.2 -- 5.2 -- 3.5 -- -1.7

Women's Teams -- 10.9 -- 7.6 -- -3.3 -- 4.5 -- 3.1 -- -1.4

Men's Revenue Sports* -- 15.7 -- 15.2 -- -0.5 -- 6.8 -- 7.5 -- +0.7

Women's Revenue Sports** -- 15.4 -- 10.2 -- -5.2 -- 7.0 -- 4.4 -- -2.6

Division III Only

Men's Teams -- 3.6 -- 3.8 -- +0.2 -- 3.1 -- 3.1 -- n/c

Women's Teams -- 3.9 -- 4.1 -- +0.2 -- 3.3 -- 3.4 -- +0.1

Men's Revenue Sports* -- 5.6 -- 5.4 -- -0.2 -- 5.1 -- 4.7 -- -0.4

Women's Revenue Sports** -- 7.2 -- 7.6 -- +0.4 -- 6.5 -- 6.5 -- n/c

*Men's revenue sports include football and basketball.

**Women's revenue sports include basketball.