The Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet used its June 1-3 meeting in Indianapolis to introduce 38 proposals into the 2005-06 Division I legislative cycle.

Among the more noteworthy measures is a proposal from the cabinet's amateurism and agents subcommittee that would allow men's ice hockey student-athletes to enter a professional league's draft one time during their collegiate career without jeopardizing their eligibility (so long as they do not sign with an agent). Similar provisions exist for student-athletes in football and basketball.

The reason for the proposal in part is to accommodate changes in the National Hockey League's draft-eligibility rules. The NHL policies make it such that 17-, 18- and 19-year-olds in ice hockey are the only players not afforded the opportunity to determine their draft status without jeopardizing their college eligibility.

Younger prospects can "opt-in" to the NHL draft, be drafted and then enroll and participate in college as long as they do not sign a contract with a professional team or agent. Current legislation, though, does not permit a student-athlete under 19 years old to "opt-in" to the NHL draft after full-time collegiate enrollment.

Cabinet members noted that the Administrative Review Committee previously has approved waivers consistent with the proposal, and that ice hockey coaches and commissioners support legislating the draft exception.

Other proposals the cabinet introduced into the legislative cycle include:

* Requiring institutions to notify student-athletes about financial aid renewal within two weeks of the last day of final exams for the academic year or within one week of the end of the school's championship segment (including postseason competition, if applicable), whichever date is later. The cabinet's financial aid subcommittee developed the proposal based on the sense that the current July 1 notification date is too late to allow student-athletes the flexibility to consider transferring or making other financial aid arrangements if their current allocation is reduced.

* Eliminating the requirement that a student-athlete must receive financial aid during the previous academic year to receive aid in the summer. Financial aid subcommittee members see this as a deregulatory effort to assist what they believe will be an increase in summer school participation (in order to meet enhanced progress-toward-degree requirements), but some cabinet members are concerned about the measure favoring schools with more financial aid resources.

* Permitting the use of nontraditional courses (for example, distance learning and correspondence courses) taken from institutions other than the student-athlete's certifying institution to be applicable to progress-toward-degree requirements under certain circumstances. While those courses would not be applicable to the fulfillment of grade-point average or credit-hour requirements in NCAA Bylaw 14.4.3.1- (b) and (c), the subcommittee is recommending through this proposal that institutions have more autonomy to determine whether those courses count toward the student-athlete's specific degree program.

* Requiring transfers to be responsible for satisfying the applicable grade-point average requirements at the end of their first full term in residence at the certifying institution. The proposal aligns requirements for transfers with those for continuing students.

* Allowing graduate students with remaining eligibility to transfer and be immediately eligible, even if they participate in sports that do not allow use of the one-time transfer exception. The cabinet's continuing-eligibility subcommittee believes the provision benefits those student-athletes wanting to pursue postgraduate work in areas not offered at their current institution, and that the likelihood of potential abuse in this area (transferring as a "ringer," for example) is low.

* Allowing midyear transfers in men's and women's basketball to be immediately eligible if they have not competed in the same championship segment at the previous institution.

* Allowing all credits earned during the first two years of collegiate enrollment that are accepted toward any program (not just the student-athlete's major) at the certifying institution to count for progress-toward-degree requirements.

Those and all other proposals the cabinet supported will be included as part of the 2005-06 legislative cycle. Conferences and the two Division I cabinets have until July 15 to officially submit proposals for the next cycle. The AEC Cabinet will have a chance to make amendments to proposals at its September meeting before the proposals appear as part of the Official Notice printed for the NCAA Convention. The Division I Management Council considers legislative proposals officially at its January meeting, followed by a membership comment period before the proposals receive final consideration from the Council and Board of Directors next April.

Amateurism clearinghouse

In addition to legislative actions, AEC Cabinet members discussed plans for an NCAA Amateurism Clearinghouse, which will act as the processing center for determining the amateurism eligibility of all freshmen, as well as transfers from international institutions wishing to compete at Divisions I and II schools.

The cabinet voted to issue a statement of support for the development of the clearinghouse, which has been proposed in legislation previously reviewed by the cabinet.

The clearinghouse concept stems from building membership concerns over amateurism issues related to both international and domestic prospects. The clearinghouse should be ready to begin certifying student-athletes initially enrolling at Divisions I and II institutions in fall 2006. The NCAA's Bill Saum, who has been appointed to oversee the clearinghouse, told the cabinet that it was a work in progress and that there will be opportunities for internal and external constituencies to provide feedback during the development of the operation.

Dave Maggard, chair of the cabinet's amateurism and agents subcommittee, told the cabinet that the clearinghouse "will be extremely beneficial to all our institutions' athletics departments" in that it will alleviate confusion, reduce competitive inequities in recruiting and decrease the likelihood of an institution running into eligibility problems once the student-athlete begins competing.

Cabinet members also discussed proposals and concepts from the Division I-A Faculty Athletics Representatives group. Among them was a recommendation to require each member institution to have a campus athletics board responsible for advising or establishing athletics policies and making policy decisions. The FAR group claims that the presence of campus athletics boards varies greatly among Division I campuses, and they believe a more uniform approach will enhance faculty oversight. In addition, the FAR group wants those boards to be composed primarily of faculty and/or academic administrators.

The FAR group also wants to specify that FARs must be appointed by the institution's CEO to serve a specified term subject to review and consultation from the faculty governance body.

Those proposals received backing from the Coalition for Intercollegiate Athletics (COIA), a group composed of faculty senate leaders from 47 Division I-A institutions. The COIA recently released a comprehensive report on faculty involvement in the oversight of intercollegiate athletics that is intended to serve as a companion piece to the larger academic-reform movement in Division I.

After discussion of the FAR concepts, the AEC Cabinet recommended that an ad hoc group be appointed to focus on those and perhaps other concepts from the COIA document and report back to the cabinet at a later date.

Other highlights

Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet
June 1-3/Indianapolis

• Did not support a request from the National Fastpitch Coaches Association to add softball to the list of sports for which student-athletes could not use the one-time transfer exception that exempts the year-in-residence requirement.

• Supported revisions to the policies used to determine whether misadvisement by institutional personnel can be used as a mitigating factor in progress-toward-degree waivers. The revisions emphasize the need for the institution requesting the waiver to demonstrate that the student-athlete relied in good faith on incorrect information given by someone who specifically had authority to do so and who claims responsibility for his or her actions. The institution's CEO also may be notified under the new policy that the misadvisement occurred and that the institution is expected to take steps to rectify the situation.

• Agreed to ask the Management Council to consider noncontroversial legislation regarding the women's volleyball recruiting calendar that establishes a quiet period from January 1 to the Friday before Martin Luther King Day and from May 1 to the Friday before Memorial Day.

• Did not support allowing a student-athlete to provide himself or herself a "self-release" to discuss the possibility of transferring to another institution (the practice recently was adopted in Division III). The cabinet's subcommittee on recruiting, however, did ask that the issue be discussed further with the Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee.

• Agreed to sponsor legislation allowing a student-athlete who is professional in one sport and amateur in another to receive institutional financial aid in the latter. The cabinet's amateurism and agents subcommittee supported the recommendation; the cabinet's financial aid subcommittee was split on the issue and took no position.