Last year, Indiana University endured one of the most divisive and disruptive chapters in its 181-year history. In April, President Myles Brand asked the vice-president of the board of trustees and me to investigate accusations against our basketball coach, Bobby Knight, and to report our findings to him and the board. The accusations, about events that by then were three years old, had been made by a former basketball player during a prime-time national sports-news broadcast. President Brand told us he would pursue any appropriate remedial action at the end of the investigation.

Ordinarily, trustee responsibilities do not include investigations within the athletics department, and we learned -- quickly -- that many critics approve of this status quo. During our investigation, we repeatedly heard the trustees "lack insight" into the world of coaching, athletics programs and athletics personnel. It even was suggested, more than once, that university trustees are not in the best position to judge the culture and values of an athletics program.

What these critics did not understand -- and others apparently still do not -- was that President Brand and the Board chose trustees to take on this assignment precisely because athletics, like any enterprise within the university, must be governed by the values that are at the foundation of the academy. Trustees, both symbolically and literally, are the custodians of these values. Rather than turning the investigation over to outsiders or the athletics administration, we believed then -- and still believe now -- that trustees were the logical individuals to carry out this investigation and, in so doing, send that message to all of our constituencies, both internal and external.

Just as important, trustees must help stem the tide of separation and divorce that is afflicting what should be a healthy marriage of academics and athletics at our institutions. As is so often the case in divorce, it's the kids who suffer. Too many student-athletes shuttle between the demands of big-time televised sports and a rigorous college education with little regard for academic preparation and scholastic achievement. Is it any wonder that we hear about compromised admissions standards for athletes, dismal graduation rates for Division I basketball players, and athletes who are completely uninspired by academic opportunity?

Although my fellow trustees and I welcome the chance to help bring the university family back together, many others seem bent on preserving this artificial divide between the athletics department and the university. Their reasons run the gamut and include the lure of financial resources, the pressure of fan support, and a seeming disconnect between the programs and their original reasons for being. The result: Intercollegiate programs in the revenue-producing sports look and feel more like commercial entertainment industries and less like the rest of the university.

While the university community celebrates honored teachers and Rhodes Scholars, the sports world turns college coaches into celebrities and glorifies athletics prowess. One might think our players and coaches were pros. Indeed, the distinction between intercollegiate athletics and professional sports is increasingly blurred, with some of the nation's colleges and universities using their players' uniforms, their arenas' walls and even their facilities' names as billboards for sponsoring companies.

Those disturbing trends are well-known and demonstrable, both statistically and anecdotally. No two athletics programs are the same, of course, and the level of concern varies from institution to institution. Up to now, most of the responsibility for dealing with these problems has fallen on athletics departments and, recently, on the presidents of our universities. Each has a role to play in reversing undesirable trends -- presidents in particular. Trustees, however, cannot ignore their responsibility for ensuring that the values of their institutions are reflected in their athletics departments.

Trustees can take a stand

At Indiana University, we have much to be proud of. There is a great tradition of academic achievement in the athletics department, where, for example, the graduation rate for our men's basketball program is roughly double that of the national average. We have had no major rules violations in the years that I have been a trustee (and for many years before), and the department has been managed in such a way that it does not need a subsidy for its operating budget from the university, though this situation becomes more tenuous as time goes by.

I saw plenty that disturbed me when I put my investigative nose inside the basketball program's tent. I found that despite all the positives connected with having a celebrity coach, there are some distinct negatives. I learned that for many, the loyalty that once belonged to the institution and its successful basketball program had been transferred to the coach -- and to the coach alone. I discovered that a wall had been built around the program, either out of arrogance or fear. Behind that wall, otherwise unacceptable behavior (sometimes violent and abusive in nature) was allowed to take place without reprimand.

I witnessed a subtle erosion of some of the institution's core values, including respect for diversity of opinion -- a value embraced by the academy but often ignored within the athletics enterprise -- and for the truth. What alarmed me most was that this lack of respect for our core values was, in some instances, being passed on to student-athletes. This was unacceptable.

One of the surprising and disappointing features of the public and internal debate about big-time college athletics is the lack of discussion about the responsibility of trustees in restoring academic values. It is the job of every trustee to advance, protect, and preserve an atmosphere in which the pursuit of knowledge and truth, and the transfer of its value to the next generation, takes precedence over all else. We are responsible to the public for doing that job correctly. I am convinced, therefore, that reform of intercollegiate athletics cannot succeed without the leadership and commitment of trustees.

Understand the enterprise

Although trustees should not micromanage an athletics department, they need a firm grasp of the complexities of the enterprise. For example, they should understand how much money is spent on scholarships and why scholarships are necessary, particularly in nonrevenue sports. They should be conversant with the cost structure of the athletics department and know the actual cost of its facilities, including depreciation and administrative overhead. They should be familiar enough with various marketing contracts to be confident that whoever is conducting negotiations is doing so in the best interests of the institution and athletes. They also need to know whether success on the playing fields translates into success in institutional fund-raising.

In addition, trustees should be familiar with the personnel policies and issues within athletics departments. Do the people who work with our student-athletes understand and respect the values of the institution? Are they supporting academic rigor? How are student-athletes doing academically? How many graduate, how long does it take and what happens to them afterward?

Trustees also should urge their institutions to move athletics back into the mainstream of the university. For example, personnel policies that apply to faculty and staff also should apply to coaches. Rules that regulate behavior and outside income must be scrutinized and enforced. Academic matters, such as eligibility and mentoring, should be administered through the chief academic office of the university and not through the athletics department. Finally, the chief financial officer of the institution should oversee the athletics department's financial affairs, and independent and internal audits should be conducted regularly, with the results reported directly to the governing board.

Reform starts with a thorough understanding by the governing board of the athletics enterprise. But reform will not advance without the support of sister institutions and national higher education organizations similarly committed to reform.

Trustees must insist that their presidents not only be dedicated to recapturing control of college sports, but that they stand up to the media, the entertainment industry, coaches and athletics directors when the institution's values are threatened. And most important, when a president takes bold action, as our president did, trustees must support and defend their president and his or her decision.

Trustees can encourage presidents to place a high priority on athletics reform by asking them to seize opportunities to make a difference through the NCAA or within their school's athletics conference. Presidents cannot let opportunities pass. It will take a critical mass of university presidents and governing boards -- working together -- to slow the athletics arms race, where the weapons are facilities and salaries, to limit commercialization even if it reduces revenue. Our goal must be to preserve the benefits of a well-functioning intercollegiate athletics system that is firmly anchored in the values of academic institutions.

John D. Walda is president of the trustees of Indiana University, Bloomington, and vice-chair of the AGB Board of Directors.