While the reform agenda in Division I is receiving a great deal of attention, let's not forget that there is a reform movement under way in Division III that is no less important. As is the case in Division I, presidents are leading the reform agenda in Division III, and I am highly supportive of their work.

Middlebury College President John McCardell and his colleagues on the Division III Presidents Council have done a remarkable job in moving a nine-proposal reform package to the 2004 NCAA Convention, where the Division III membership will decide on measures that will shape the future of the division.

The reform proposals for the 2004 Convention reflect the results of a concerted effort to compare the Division III philosophy with the division's athletics rules and practices. It is the product of almost two years of extensive membership discussion, including a membership survey and focus groups. The process that produced the proposals was broad-based and collaborative.

Notable among the proposals in the package are measures to establish an annual financial aid reporting process, establish the principle that recruitment of athletes should be consistent with an institution's admissions procedures, reduce playing and practice seasons and contest limits, and eliminate the practice of red-shirting.

The package also features a proposal that would prohibit Division III schools that sponsor Division I programs from offering athletics scholarships in those sports. This proposal, understandably, has generated concern from valued Division III institutions that successfully sponsor teams in Division I competition. The important thing to remember in giving due consideration to this proposal -- in the appropriate forum for that discussion, which is on the Convention floor -- is that this measure, too, reflects Division III leaders' best effort to align practice with philosophy.

While they may differ on some details, Division III institutions overwhelmingly have demonstrated throughout the reform process that they are united in their commitment to the Division III philosophy. The reform package as a whole reflects that unity.

How Division III wishes to shape its future truly is a membership decision. While I do not have a vote, I feel strongly in this case that the package is well thought out and progressive, and it advances the philosophy of Division III.

The reform package helps put back into perspective the role of the student-athlete on campus. The Mellon Foundation's William G. Bowen and co-author Sarah A. Levin in their latest book, "Reclaiming the Game," are correct in pointing out that there is a growing divide on at least some Division III campuses between student-athletes and the general student body. In preparation for the 2004 Convention, I hope the reform package and this book will generate constructive dialogue on every Division III campus regarding the proper role that athletics should play in the higher education of our student-athletes.

People who are engaged in intercollegiate athletics -- not only in Division III, but in all divisions -- are highly competitive, and we would expect them to work as hard as they can to be as proficient as they can and to win. That is a natural approach and not unexpected. But I think we have to take a step back -- and this is what the Division III Presidents Council members have done -- and affirm that a positive balance between athletics and academics is our primary role as academic institutions. The Division III reform agenda attempts to reassert that balance and ensure student-athletes and their parents that these are institutions focused first and foremost on education.

It is not an anti-athletics approach by any means, but an approach that brings increased balance to a situation that has seen some drift.

The Division III Presidents Council will convene later this month to further deliberate the reform agenda, but the group already has reiterated its support for the package as a whole and has set the stage for membership debate and decision in January. The Council should not attempt to amend the legislation, or even anticipate potential amendments to the package at this time, for that would infringe upon the membership's right to debate legislation on the Convention floor.

The package the Presidents Council has developed and supported is thoughtful. This group has acted with the best interests of Division III as a whole in mind.

Myles Brand is president of the NCAA.