PROVIDENCE, Rhode Island -- When it comes to representation, the Division II Student-Athlete Advisory Committee has a simple philosophy: more is better.

Operating with an almost completely different cast of participants than at the 2001 Management Council/Student-Athlete Advisory Committee Summit, the members of the Division II SAAC chose to take a big leap at the July 20-21 meeting and recommended two new ways of developing expanded student-athlete representation.

First, they recommended to the Management Council that the Division II SAAC be given the right to cast a collective vote at the annual Division II business session of the NCAA Convention. SAAC Vice-Chair Cameron Macdonald of Rockhurst University said that while such a vote would be largely symbolic -- only one of about 300 votes that can be cast at a Convention -- the change would be justified because of several factors:

The SAAC is the single voice representing Division II student-athletes across the country.

Division II SAAC legislative positions are derived through national surveys of Division II student-athletes.

Providing a vote to the SAAC would help legitimize SAAC influence with student-athletes at member institutions and conferences.

A vote would provide student-athletes with direct representation that they do not currently possess.

A vote would provide a historical record of student-athlete legislative positions.

Macdonald acknowledged the traditional counter-argument -- that other Division II committees do not have the right to a vote. "While this is true," Macdonald said, "individuals on those committees have a direct vote through their school or conference representation. Those individuals are able to exert influence on their school and conference votes. If all committees on our level were also given a vote, essentially the same people would be voting twice."

Association-wide issue

At first glance, the issue would seem to fit under the legislative autonomy provided to each of the divisions when membership restructuring occurred in 1997. However, the legislation describing voting is found in Constitution 5.1.3.1.1, which is a dominant provision. That means that it applies to all members of the Association and that changing it would require a two-thirds majority vote of all delegates (all divisions) present and voting at a joint session of the Convention.

Because of that complication and because of a need to make sure that the membership has an opportunity to digest the ramifications of the proposal, the Management Council referred the concept to the Student-Athlete Involvement Project Team, with the understanding that any resulting legislation would be considered at the 2004 Convention.

The SAAC also wants greater representation on selected Division II committees, which is something that the division can control on its own.

Division II student-athletes currently are represented on an advisory basis on selected Association-wide committees, including competitive-safeguards, Minority Opportunities and Interests, Olympic Sports Liaison, Research, Sportsmanship and Ethical Conduct, and Women's Athletics. However, the student-athletes do not have a seat on key Division II general committees that play major roles in developing policy that affects student-athletes -- in particular, the Academic Requirements, Championships and Legislation Committees.

The fate of student-athlete representation on Division II general committees may rest with how the Management and Presidents Councils view the time demands associated with such committee service. "I don't know how they would find the time to do it without missing a significant amount of class," said one administrator. In fact, three- and four-day meetings are not uncommon for the committees in question.

However, another administrator recalled the model of the Association of Intercollegiate Athletics for Women, which mandated student-athlete participation, both on the committee level and at the annual convention. "I thought it was tremendous," she said in response to the student-athlete effort to acquire more representation. "Sometimes we bring problems on ourselves and open ourselves to groups like the CAC (Collegiate Athletes Coalition), which tells them they don't have a voice. I think the student-athletes have a great point, and I'm right behind them."

Committee representation

As with the question of whether to provide student-athletes with a Convention vote, the Management Council believed that the issue of student-athlete committee representation is too important to rush through the system. It voted to refer the issue to the Student-Athlete Involvement Project Team. That group likely will look at matters such as missed class time; whether student-athletes would be voting or ex officio members of the committees (the student-athlete proposal is to be a voting member); and treatment of confidential information, especially with regard to the Academic Requirements Committee.

Other issues

The 6th annual summit had a bit different feel than those of recent years because of the unusual amount of attrition that occurred over the last 12 months. Of the 25 members of the SAAC, only three attended last year's meeting -- and one of those three, SAAC Chair Briana Williams of Mount Olive College, was ill and missed the meeting. Eunique Reaves of Quincy University provided leadership in Williams' absence and during times when Macdonald was unavailable because of another commitment.

Beyond representation, the student-athletes had other issues on their minds, such as championship awards, conference student-athlete advisory committees, health and safety issues, and Division II image.

Janel McNeal of Emporia State University said that the SAAC believes the current paper championship participation certificates are inadequate and recommended that they be replaced by something more substantial, such as a medallion or other memento.

The SAAC also developed guidelines describing a model conference SAAC, an exercise modeled after an earlier Management Council project to describe a model conference office. In the SAAC model, a typical conference SAAC would have a functioning Web site; a roster of institutions and representatives (including contact information); a binder containing minutes of meetings, along with descriptions of any community-service work; and participation by a conference administrator.

Health and safety issues involve a wide range of topics, but two particular issues were cited by the student-athletes -- better oversight over the use of 15-passenger vans and a more complete understanding of what insurance responsibilities are required of student-athletes.

As for image, the student-athletes and the administrators brainstormed about what might be done to bring about a better public understanding of Division II. They reacted favorably to a draft of a "Division II Membership Profile" publication and also joined administrators in a discussion about image issues associated with Division II graduation rates.

In general, student-athletes said they did not believe their image is sullied by Division II's 49 percent graduation rate. Moreover, they said they were not influenced by graduation-rate data when they were choosing an institution. The administrators, while open to a study that would count athletes not receiving athletically related aid and that would treat transfers differently than the current report, shared the belief of the student-athletes that their institutions are not affected individually because of the overall Division II rate.