The Division II Academic Requirements Committee has asked the NCAA Research Committee to provide more information on what effects various initial-eligibility standards would have in Division II.

The current Division II initial-eligibility standard is the same as the old Proposition 48 (at least an 820 SAT or 68 ACT and a minimum core-course grade-point average of 2.000). Division II permits four years of eligibility for partial qualifiers and permits partial qualifiers to receive athletically related financial aid the first year of enrollment.

The review was brought about because of a lower-court ruling in Cureton v. NCAA, which temporarily set aside Division I initial-eligibility standards. An appeals court overturned the lower-court ruling, but the case is still working its way through the courts.

Although the Division II initial-eligibility standard is different from Division I's, the Division II Academic Requirements Committee, which met February 10-11 in Sarasota, Florida, has asked for alternate models since Division II uses a cutoff (820 SAT or 68 ACT) on standardized test scores. Division I's use of such a cutoff score was a primary factor in the lower court's ruling against the NCAA.

The Academic Requirements Committee asked for research on what effect the following initial-eligibility approaches would have on access and graduation rates in Division II:

A sliding scale similar, but not identical, to the one currently used in Division I.

Requiring prospective student-athletes to have completed more core courses (for instance, an extra year of math).

Giving more weight to specific portions of standardized tests.

Allowing prospects to qualify by meeting to-be-determined standards in two of the three current standards: grade-point average, standardized test scores and core courses.

There appears to be widespread satisfaction with the current initial-eligibility standards in Division II. Beyond the fact that many Division II administrators believe the rule is fair, some also have noted that although Division II's standards do involve a cut score, partial qualifiers lose no eligibility or financial aid as a consequence of failing to fully qualify. Those factors could make it harder for potential litigants to demonstrate that they were harmed by Division II's standards.

However, the Academic Requirements Committee believes it is duty-bound to examine the initial-eligibility standards given the uncertainty of the Cureton outcome.

The group also believes that other reasons demand a review of the standards at this time:

Both national testing agencies have said that their standardized tests were not designed to be used the way the NCAA uses them.

No academic-performance data were available when the current standards were established. The NCAA now has abundant data that it can use to make appropriate adjustments in standards.

Division I continues to review its initial-eligibility standards, and any changes it makes would affect Division II. The committee believes that Divisions I and II standards at least should be similar as a service to prospective student-athletes. It also believes that significantly different standards would make it more difficult, and possibly more expensive, for the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse to process applications for the different divisions.

In other business, the Academic Requirements Committee:

Requested research on how junior college transfers have performed academically in Division II.

Requested creation of an academic performance census study similar to the one currently undertaken in Division I.

Expressed a desire to identify ways to publicize academic success stories in Division II and also ways in which institutions or conferences have achieved better academic outcomes.

Explored the possibility of requiring midyear certification of satisfactory progress in Division II. The committee asked the Faculty Athletics Representatives Association to determine how many conferences and institutions currently certify satisfactory progress at midyear.