Graduation rates, which college and university presidents have longed to improve, took another jump in the right direction as data from the entering class of 1996 show student-athletes obtained degrees at a record rate.

The 1996 class represents a milestone cohort, not just because of its success, but because it is the first to have gone through college under the eligibility standards known as Proposition 16. Prop 16 was landmark legislation because it established a sliding scale index that combined high-school grade-point averages and standardized-test scores to determine initial eligibility. When it was approved at the 1992 NCAA Convention, researchers predicted that graduation rates would increase to about 62 percent, which proved to be accurate.

In addition to the overall increase, the 1996 class also graduated at higher rates by group than the 1995 cohort. Blacks in men's basketball made a significant jump -- from 35 percent in 1995 to 41 percent in 1996. Division I-A black football players also rose three percentage points -- from 46 to 49 percent. Other groups, including white male and white female basketball student-athletes, black female basketball student-athletes and white football student-athletes were within one percentage point, plus or minus, of their 1995 counterparts.

Other revealing comparisons can be made between groups of student-athletes and the student body in the 1996 cohort. The following breakouts among student-athletes graduated at higher rates than their student body counterparts: all student-athletes (62 percent to 59 percent); white student-athletes (65 to 62); black student-athletes (52 to 41), black male student-athletes (48 to 35), white female student-athletes (72 to 64) and black female student-athletes (62 to 46).

More specific comparisons also favor student-athletes. For example, Division I black male basketball players in the 1996 cohort graduated six percentage points higher than black males in the student body (41 percent to 35 percent). Division I-A black football players were seven percentage points higher (49 to 42). Rates for black female basketball players were even more dramatic -- 58 percent for student-athletes compared to 46 percent for black female students.

Rates in football, men's basketball

Division I-A football student-athletes in the 1996 cohort graduated at a 54 percent rate, one percentage point higher than the 1995 class but seven percentage points below the 1996 student body. Men's basketball players overall were at 44 percent for the 1996 class compared to 43 percent for 1995. Neither group has graduated at a higher rate than the student body in any year since graduation rates began being tracked with the 1984 class, but both have experienced increases in each of the last two classes. It is also important to note that these groups of student-athletes do tend to graduate at higher rates than their gender and ethnic group counterparts in the student body.

Rates continue to be high in women's basketball, as the 1996 class posted a rate of 66 percent, one percentage point higher than the 1995 group.

NCAA President Myles Brand said the 1996 data represent good news, especially given that the federal graduation-rates methodology does not take into account those students who transfer into institutions after their freshman year, nor does it account for those students who transfer from institutions in good academic standing.

"College presidents and athletics administrators have known for a long time that the federally mandated methodology does not accurately reflect the academic success at most of our programs," Brand said. "Still, even under the flawed federal rate, our student-athletes regularly achieve higher graduation marks than their student body counterparts. And there is reason to believe that success will increase, since subsequent classes in the research will have been better prepared to meet Prop 16 standards."

Impact on numbers

Brand noted, however, that though the research on the 1996 class revealed higher graduation rates -- especially for black student-athletes -- there also were fewer black student-athletes in the data set. Indeed, the proportion of African-American student-athletes in the 1996 class dropped by about three percentage points compared to the 1995 class. Critics of Prop 16 warned that the more stringent initial-eligibility standard, particularly the test-score component, could affect access to higher education for minorities.

Todd Petr, NCAA managing director of research, said graduation rates reflected the same kind of drop in the proportion of minority student-athletes in the 1986 class, the first to have matriculated under stricter eligibility measures at that time (Proposition 48). "But subsequent classes showed a rebound as more minority student-athletes met the new standard," Petr said. "We likely will see a similar rebound with future incoming classes."

Petr said though the research indicates fewer black student-athletes overall, those in the system graduated at a higher rate than previous cohorts.

Brand said that the NCAA has been responsive to concerns about access for as many prospective student-athletes as possible, noting that Division I passed legislation last year that eliminated the cut score for the standardized-test component for initial eligibility. That standard becomes effective with this year's entering class, as do enhanced progress-toward-degree requirements designed to have a positive impact on graduation rates without restricting access to higher education.

"The goal in developing the most recent eligibility models was to maximize graduation rates while minimizing disparate impact," Brand said. "We believe that eliminating the test-score cut will increase access and that the new progress-toward-degree benchmarks -- particularly in the student-athlete's first two years -- will put athletes on track to graduate at even higher rates than they already do."

Also of note regarding graduation rates is the NCAA's pursuit of an alternative methodology that accounts for transfers in good academic standing. That proposed rate, called the NCAA Graduation Success Rate, has been forwarded as part of the overall academic reform movement under way in Division I. The NCAA rate will track transfers (both into and out of an institution) and provide a more accurate and real-time assessment of graduation success for all athletics programs. The NCAA rate, however, would not replace the federally mandated methodology. The NCAA has approached the Department of Education about possible modifications to the federal rate, but so far, Department officials have rejected that idea.

The NCAA Graduation Success Rate is part of the academic reform package that could be approved by the Board of Directors as early as April 2004.