A good portion of the current NCAA Manual is devoted to measures that save us from ourselves. In an ideal world, all of us would follow basic rules of integrity, while the NCAA could hold occasional workshops and camps and serve as a clearinghouse for revenue-generating activities.

That such a world does not exist should not be a cause for either resignation or cynicism. As faculty athletics representatives, we can and should be doing a better job to move toward that better world.

Foremost, we should remember why we are in higher education to begin with: we did not choose this profession for great wealth and status; we are in this enterprise because we love to teach, and we enjoy our interaction with students. The classroom is our arena, and ideas are our currency.

In our role as faculty athletics representatives, our highest priority is the student-athlete. This is not to say that our CEOs, athletics administrators and coaches are indifferent to student-athlete welfare. But it is a fact of intercollegiate athletics life these days, especially at the Division I level, that financial considerations, alumni concerns and community expectations compete with and occasionally contradict student-athlete welfare issues and generate significant pressure on academic and athletics administrators.

The enormous pressure placed on Indiana University, Bloomington, President Myles Brand during the Bob Knight affair merely is one example of the strains and pulls of intercollegiate athletics on the general academic enterprise.

I am not suggesting that faculty are completely impervious to such pressures, but we can and should elevate student-athlete welfare above all other contentions. We are the independent voices on our campuses: no board of trustees can dismiss us, and no one is checking our wins and losses or how much money we raised last month.

With this independence comes responsibility. New NCAA regulations with respect to amateurism, men's basketball and continuing eligibility directly address and enhance student-athlete welfare. But legislation will not

accomplish this objective without the vigilance of its member institutions, especially the active participation of faculty athletics representatives. What, specifically, can we do on our campuses to ensure the maximum benefits from new legislation and for the student-athlete in general?

We need to assess the academic support services for our student-athletes. What are the lines of authority? Who pays for the director of the service? How do tutors operate? Are student-athletes well-served by the system?

We need to monitor the curriculum, especially the courses and majors pursued by basketball and football student-athletes, those individuals for which data show are less likely to graduate than other student-athletes. We have come a long way from the days of crass exploitation, but both the mentality and reality of such exploitation persist.

We need to make efforts to meet with and be available for student-athletes. Our independence will enable student-athletes to raise concerns with us that they might hesitate to initiate with coaches or athletics administrators.

We need to have open lines of communication with athletics administrators, coaches and CEOs. We are all in this together. There is nothing adversarial in our relationships. We simply come at things from different perspectives, and that is both healthy and good. And, most important, we must communicate with our colleagues on the faculty where misconceptions about student-athletes, and about intercollegiate athletics generally, abound. Part of that is our fault.

Faculty reps, of course, do many other things with respect to intercollegiate athletics. This is hardly an exhaustive list. And I don't think for a minute that if we follow these principles everything that troubles intercollegiate athletics suddenly will vanish. But we must be a consistent and strong voice for academic integrity and student-athlete welfare. Our students deserve it.

David Goldfield is the faculty athletics representative at the University of North Carolina, Charlotte.