Guest editorial -- Minority women need a place in diversity mix
By Cheryl Levick and Charles Whitcomb
A historic summit took place in November to address athletics opportunities for minority women. It was the first time that leaders from almost every major women's and minority sports organization gathered to address common issues.
But that wasn't why the summit was historic.
It was historic because a group of distinctively different leaders tackled a common -- and nagging -- issue head-on in a forum designed to make a difference.
The group that met in Dallas November 9 focused on inclusion in college sports. There has been a lot of talk about inclusion in recent years but very little action. Data from the NCAA's 1997-98 race demographics report indicate that just under 2 percent of all athletics administrators are minority women (historically black colleges and universities excluded). Minority women don't fare much better in the coaching ranks, accounting for only 2.2 percent of nearly 7,000 head coaches. Minority women aren't well represented on the fields and courts, either, with most of the small percentage of minority women student-athletes concentrated just in the sports of basketball and track.
Statistics for minority males are not much better. Minority men represent slightly more than 5 percent of college athletics administrators and a little more than 10 percent of head coaches. And overall numbers for women, though improved from past years, still are lagging at 35.7 percent for administrators and less than 50 percent in the head coaching ranks.
Because of these big-picture numbers, one of the panelists suggested late in the summit that perhaps the goals of the gathering were not broad enough. In assembling so many prominent individuals, why not spend that energy on diversity for all groups rather than just one particular constituent? In other words, why not be inclusive rather than, perhaps, exclusive?
A deeper look into the purpose of the summit reveals the answer. The NCAA already has two powerful guardian groups -- the Committee on
Women's Athletics and the Minority Opportunities and Interests Committee -- charged with advancing opportunities for women and minorities. But some issues that specifically affect minority women have gone unaddressed. The demographics prove that.
The issues that have been highlighted in the media recently deal with minority men (the lack of football and basketball coaches, in particular), but there has not been a focus on minority women. Racism involves both men and women, certainly, but the purpose of this meeting was to focus on minority women. That does not mean we can't forget about diversity in all sports and for all people. Our continued efforts on the men's side are still there. This summit was not at the expense of men's issues.
In the world of intercollegiate athletics, minority women are more invisible than minority men. We have made some inroads in changing the culture and bringing the issue of hiring minorities to the forefront, but there still is a tendency for schools to hire a minority male and think they can check off on the diversity card. That is not an answer to the problem. An extra focus is needed for minority females.
So where do we go from here? Certainly, the summit produced many possibilities for rapid improvement. From regional seminars and workshops to grants and internships, there are ways of increasing opportunities for prospective athletes and administrators. But none of this will be possible without commitment and designated funding.
And that commitment has to start at the top. The summit was a good start -- we received a commitment from every leader at the table. But the NCAA will have to show a similar commitment from presidents, athletics directors, senior woman administrators and conference commissioners across the country. We need those commitments and buy-ins to continue to challenge the minds of the membership to make progress.
Results from the summit will begin to become apparent soon. Within the next few months, specific initiatives will be proposed. Some may require legislation. Some may require funding. All will require commitment.
We urge NCAA members to pay attention to these initiatives when they surface at the committee, cabinet and Management Council levels. It is important to support these initiatives -- not just because we're asking for that support -- but because it's the right thing to do.
The NCAA needs to redouble its efforts on inclusion. Minority women, and indeed all groups, deserve that commitment.
The point is that we should not have had to convene a special summit to address such a fundamental issue. No group should have to depend on such action for such basic attention. The summit was necessary, however, because no significant progress has been made for minority women in intercollegiate athletics in the last decade.
Let's not waste this effort. It's up to all of us, inclusively, to make a difference.
Cheryl L. Levick is the senior associate director of athletics at Stanford University and chair of the NCAA Committee on Women's Athletics. Charles Whitcomb is the faculty athletics representative at San Jose State University and chair of the NCAA Minority Opportunities and Interests Committee.
Comment -- Coach's influence hits home at early age
By Les Robinson
North Carolina State University
Recently, I saw an interview with Bill Bradley on a major television network. The interviewer recounted Bradley's resume: an honor student and all-American at Princeton University, Rhodes Scholar, NBA All-Star, U.S. senator, and now a presidential candidate.
"I've always been an extremely motivated person," Bradley commented. The interviewer then asked the natural question: "Why?" I listened with great interest for his answer.
Without hesitating, Bradley said, "I always think back to when I was 13 or 14 years old. I remember sitting on the floor at a summer basketball camp I attended in St. Louis near my hometown. The coach was talking about the importance of fundamentals. I remember him saying, 'If you guys go home and waste your time and spend it reading comic books or watching cartoons, just remember: While you're doing that, somebody somewhere is working, and when you meet, he is going to beat you.'
"I always felt that if I was resting, somebody was going to beat me," Bradley said.
I couldn't help but note a key point illustrated by this interview, particularly for our coaches, but really for any of our staff. Often as coaches, we may take for granted what we say to our student-athletes or campers. It can become routine. Or maybe we don't think we're getting through to them, an experience shared by all teachers and coaches.
But Bradley's comment reminded me of the awesome potential impact of our words.
Here is an accomplished scholar and successful professional by every measure. He earned degrees and the highest academic honors at the most prestigious institutions in the world. He participated in sports at the highest level and won individual honors and championships. He has held positions of leadership among the top levels of public service. And now he is a candidate for the highest office in the land.
So what was the first thing that came to mind when asked about his motivation in life? The words of a coach at a summer camp spoken nearly 50 years ago.
Think of all the learned and outstanding people who must have influenced Bill Bradley during his lifetime. Isn't it amazing that when asked about his motivation, he recalls the words of his youth basketball camp coach?
Because many young people have a strong desire to excel in their sport, coaches command their attention and respect when others may not. As coaches, let's all be reminded of the privilege we have to be a positive influence and make a difference.
Bill Bradley is a prime example of what can happen as a result.
Les Robinson is the director of athletics at North Carolina State University.
Comment -- Division II SAAC wants to retain status quo
By Rob Morrissey, Vassar College
For more than a year, the NCAA Division III Student-Athlete Advisory Committee has lobbied for membership recognition and support of its position regarding nontraditional seasons. Our committee unanimously supports the current status of the nontraditional season.
We understand the complexities of the topic; however, we feel strongly that it retains both a theoretical and practical purpose. The Division III Student-Athlete Advisory Committee is looking forward to an opportunity to articulate the student-athlete position on this matter at the 2000 NCAA Convention.
During the 1999 NCAA Foundation Leadership Conference, our committee had the opportunity to discuss this matter with numerous Division III student-athletes. Many representatives expressed concern with the potential modification to the nontraditional-season legislation. While acknowledging that very real issues exist related to nontraditional-season competition at the Division III level (financial implications, coaching commitments, multisport student-athletes, and health and safety issues), it is the feeling of the committee that decisions on its continuance rest most appropriately with the respective student-athletes and athletics administrators at each institution.
The mere suggestion of eliminating competition during the nontraditional season troubles the Division III Student-Athlete Advisory Committee. Too often, athletics is perceived as something other than a component in the total educational experience. And how does the athletics department differ from any other academic department on campus? Seldom, without repercussion, do departments deprive students of opportunities that produce a positive experience.
Competition during the nontraditional season is a positive experience. It is my understanding that for the majority of Division III student-athletes, the four-year experience is the last in highly organized competition. That fact alone should deter those individuals considering diminishing the competitive environment that student-athletes cherish.
Currently, the Division III membership is calling for deregulatory measures so that we don't lose sight of the primary focus -- the student-athlete. If the membership decides to pursue modification of the current nontraditional season format, what sort of message does this send? If the status quo remains, the option of revisiting the issue always remains. It is our feeling, however, that whether or not an athletics department decides to conduct competition during the nontraditional season is completely an institutional decision.
Participation in athletics at the Division III level is as much an educational opportunity as it is a physical activity. The Division III philosophy statement says to "encourage participation by maximizing the number and variety of athletics opportunities for students."
The athletics experience at the Division III level is most appropriately viewed as a long-term investment in the education of students. This notion is in keeping with the mission of all departments on campus. The cornerstone philosophy of athletics participation on the Division III level is to provide educational opportunities for all through intercollegiate athletics competition. Removing opportunities for growth through competition will most assuredly decrease the intangible value of the student-athlete experience.
We at the Division III level must ask ourselves if the elimination of competition in the nontraditional segment leads us down a path that ends with over-regulation, similar to what is seen on the Division I level.
Rob Morrissey is a student-athlete at Vassar College and a member of the Division III Student-Athlete Advisory Committee.
Opinions -- New contract will generate ideas for program spending
Deborah Yow , director of athletics
University of Maryland, College Park
Washington Post
Discussing the impact of the NCAA's new $6 billion television contract:
"There are a number of appropriate ways to use the funds to the benefit of student-athletes. Everybody will come out of the woodwork with ideas on how to spend the money. (In the Atlantic Coast Conference), there is a sentiment that sending the money to the schools is spending it for your student-athletes. You'd be spending it for your women's programs, for additional scholarships, improvements to career support and academic improvement programs and improvements to basic services for student-athletes. But this also will raise the question -- and appropriately so -- of stipends for student-athletes or a new way of calculating the value of scholarship."
Basketball issues
Lute Olson, head men's basketball coach
University of Arizona
Los Angeles Times
Discussing basketball student-athletes leaving school early for the professional leagues:
"It's going to happen more and more. It's just the mind-set of the kids. You see it at Nike and Adidas camps in summer. If they have to go to college, it's like 'God, I didn't make my first goal.' It's crazy."
Michael A. Tranghese, commissioner
Big East Conference
Los Angeles Times
"Kids continue to leave and leave. I worry about the NBA forming a minor league. I don't know how to equate all that. My fear is if you carry it out in its worst scenario, it could have a devastating effect. At the end of the day, it's all whether the public buys it or not. ...
"Unfortunately, the stories of kids coming out and failing is really not drawing a lot of attention, as opposed to Kevin Garnetts and Jonathan Benders making it. The schools at the top will still get the best players, but the ones at the bottom, their chances of getting a Wally Szczerbiak are less and less."
