The role of a school's logo or mascot may not seem to be directly related to sportsmanship, but when an institution uses American Indian mascots, nicknames or logos, it can be perceived as demeaning, insensitive or discriminatory and thus negatively affect the competitve environment.

Individual institutions nationwide have long struggled with the use of American Indian mascots -- often facing both harsh criticism from those who believe the mascot is racist and from alumni who value the mascot enough to threaten the withdrawal of financial support if a change is made. The issue is a difficult one for all NCAA institutions that use American Indian mascots, nicknames or logos.

In an effort to clarify an institution's position on the American Indian mascot, nickname or logo, the NCAA earlier this year distributed self-evaluations to the 31 schools that have such an issue. The self-evaluations, created by the NCAA staff and the Minority Opportunities and Interests Committee (MOIC) at the behest of the NCAA Executive Committee, are due back to the MOIC by May 1. Several responses already have been returned.

The self-evaluation follows on the heels of a more general study conducted in 2002. Ron Stratten, NCAA vice-president for education services, said he hopes the self-evaluation will require less time and contain fewer questions than the earlier survey.

"It is directed toward the members' alignment with NCAA principles," Stratten said. The MOIC and the Executive Committee will use the self-evaluations to determine if the institutions have continued a dialogue with those who protest their logo or mascot or if they have re-evaluated their past positions on the issue.

The NCAA constitution states that the responsibility of maintaining an environment that "values cultural diversity and gender equity among its student-athletes and intercollegiate athletics department staff" belongs to each member institution. NCAA policy also requires an "atmosphere of respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person." Each institution also must determine its own nondiscrimination policy.

Robert Vowels, MOIC chair and commissioner of the Southwestern Athletic Conference, said a key element of the new self-evaluation is collaboration with American Indian tribes and soliciting their input on the issue.

"Here you have a sector that can really express their views on how they feel about the logo and nickname issue. I'm sure some of the tribes are really struggling with these issues and may have mixed views," Vowels said. "They're going to try to let folks know how they feel, if given a chance."

The self-evaluations are intended to give the Executive Committee and the MOIC a more complete assessment of the issue and how each institution approaches it. Repercussions for ignoring the issue or refusing to participate in the self-evaluation are possible. Vowels said the MOIC would discuss such action at its June meeting, after all institutions have responded.

"We talked about trying to put some teeth into things and seeing what we might need to do if we got to that point," Vowels said, saying he didn't know if an American Indian mascot could still be inclusive. "That's the big question we are asking. We need to hear from the institutions and the tribes and from the people that such decisions directly affect, to see if there is a middle ground that we all can reach."

The survey asks the institution to answer questions about (1) the origin of the nickname, (2) history behind it, (3) how deci sions are made about the mascot and (4) attempts to value diversity and sportsmanship. The survey also asks institutions to provide a list of formal complaints pertaining to American Indian mascots filed against it in the last three years.

The process is nonjudgmental, contrary to some media reports in the wake of the distribution of the survey.

"We're not saying the institution's behavior is bad -- we just want them to get closure from the people in their area," Stratten said. "We would like to see institutions work with Indian tribes."

The MOIC will examine the quality of responses from institutions and their efforts to open dialogue before making any recommendations about further action.

Stratten said one NCAA institution that did its own self-evaluation several years ago came to the conclusion that it would divorce itself from its American Indian logo and mascot, despite its history and tradition.

California State University, Stanislaus, retained its nickname, the Warriors, but moved away from using an American Indian mascot and logo. William Ruud, vice-president for development and university relations, said the institution is about to unveil a new mascot with a Middle Ages knight feel to it.

The American Indian theme was originally adopted from the name of the county in which the school is located -- Stanislaus County was named for Chief Estanislaus of the Miwok tribe. In the late 1990s, at the direction of university President Marvalene Hughes (a former Division II Presidents Council member), Cal State Stanislaus officials began examining the mascot with input from students, faculty, staff and community members.

The discussions produced a decision that "Warriors" is a good nickname because of its broad nature and application to many different types of people.

"The Warrior name is a good, passionate sports name but we said, 'Let's see if we can't do a different kind of representation,' " Ruud said. "We separated the Native American theme from the Warrior theme and felt it was appropriate to go forward with Warriors because it was a broad representation of successful participation."

The split was difficult, he said, because of the tradition associated with any university's graphic identity, be it athletics or institution-wide.

After an unpopular attempt to create a "warrior hawk" soon after separating from the American Indian connotation, school officials began working with the Gallo Wine Corporation, a nearby company with which it already had formed a partnership, to develop a new logo. The new look, to be unveiled this month, was developed through a process that was valued by various university constituencies, Ruud said.

"I think it's healthy to go through a process, and it's healthy to respect people and their values," he said. "You want to really look at the students and really look at the community and figure out what you want to be. I think it was very powerful (to change the representation)."