Early results from a study of former high school and college student-athletes indicate that the graduation rates of Division I student-athletes might be even higher than indicated by either the NCAA’s Graduation Success Rate or the federal graduation rate.

While NCAA staff is still analyzing the data from the Study of Col-
lege Outcomes and Recent Exper-iences (SCORE) and the Growth, Opportunities, Aspirations and Learn-ing of Students in college (GOALS) studies, early indications are that they may reveal higher graduation rates and the tendency for student-athletes to be as engaged academically as non-athletes.

Staff will discuss SCORE and GOALS in several sessions at the NCAA Convention, including an Association-wide session January 6, and in presentations to various divisional groups that include the national Student-Athlete Advisory Committees.

"There are so many ways to cut the data across divisions and sports, we’re going to be able to tell a lot of different stories," Tom Paskus, NCAA principal research scientist, said of the studies. "There’s so much in both surveys. We’re looking to whet the appetite at Convention and get people thinking about different questions."

Data will be presented during the Association-wide session, followed by a question-and-answer period with a panel of student-athletes, including representatives from the national SAACs.

GOALS surveyed about 21,000 current NCAA student-athletes across all divisions. The survey was administered to between one and three athletics teams on 621 campuses by the faculty athletics representative. FARs help administer other NCAA surveys on campus, including the drug-use survey.

The student-athletes answered questions about their athletics, academic and social experiences in college, as well as their overall student-athlete experience. Health and well-being, time commitment and demographic questions were also included.

About half of the participants agreed to have their high school and college academic data merged with their survey responses. That will happen after the current Division I Academic Performance Rate data are finalized.

The Convention presentation will feature an initial analysis of responses to questions about time commitments, academic engagement, support of athletics personnel in meeting academic goals and post-college career aspirations.

"It’s fantastic data. We can really get at in-depth items related to experiences and issues unique to the student-athlete," Paskus said.

Because of its concentration on the academic and career attainment of former Division I student-athletes, SCORE will be more of a priority for that division and less of a focus during the Association-wide educational session.

SCORE surveyed about 8,500 people who graduated from high school in 1994 on topics like college sports experiences, college educational experiences, current career and work experience, health and well-being, daily life experiences and various demographic items.

About half of those surveyed participated in the first Division I Academic Performance Census in 1994 and therefore were known to have played a Division I sport. The other half of the participants were students who applied to the Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse in 1994. Student-athletes who were recruited by institutions in Divisions I and II and academic nonqualifiers also were surveyed.

The survey was conducted through the mail, and the response rate of more than 30 percent was high, though some demographic groups were under-represented. To boost those responses, staff made targeted appeals throughout the summer and fall.

Paskus said the staff is using many different comparison groups in analyzing the data, including data from "Monitoring the Future," an ongoing University of Michigan study of the behaviors, attitudes and values of high school and college students and young adults. The Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Education’s National Survey of Student Engagement and the American Institutes for Research 1987-88 National Study of Intercollegiate Athletics also are being used.

Limited results were unveiled to the national SAAC groups and at the Faculty Athletics Representatives Association Fall Forum in November and to the NCAA Baseball Academic Enhancement Working Group in October.