Division I Academic Cabinet members determined that transfers from two-year colleges, nontraditional coursework and academic support services at institutions are among their top priorities in the coming months.

The new cabinet met for the first time September 8-9 in Indianapolis.

One of the major issues the group will tackle will be the challenges presented by student-athletes who transfer from a two-year to a four-year institution.

Cabinet members will examine the recommendations of the Division I Transfer Issues Ad Hoc Group, and consider items like additional core-course requirements for 2-4 transfers, the idea of an academic year in residence and other recommendations. The cabinet emphasized the importance of data on which to base decisions, and went so far as to ask the Committee on Academic Performance to collect more data related to the academic profile of a successful 2-4 transfer.

The group would also like to learn more about nontraditional coursework on campuses, including best practices, and academic support programs available to student-athletes. The cabinet identified a few members to work with the NCAA research staff and representatives from academic partner organizations on developing a survey to find out more about academic support programs in Division I.

Cabinet members also said they would focus on student-athlete time demands and degree-selection issues.

Continuing reform

The cabinet also heard an update on the new academic early qualifiers, which began with the 2008 high school graduating class. The cabinet will sponsor noncontroversial legislation asking for member institutions to submit final transcripts for early qualifiers by November 15. The transcripts would be collected for research purposes only.

To prepare themselves for their future work, cabinet members heard a thorough history of the latest cycle of academic reform, including the impact of recent changes in initial-eligibility and progress-toward-degree standards, as well as changes in transfer requirements and the effect of the Academic Performance Program.

The background discussion is expected to guide the group as members set priorities and identify future issues. The group reviewed the research that led to the decisions made to strengthen eligibility requirements and develop the Academic Progress Rate.

Cabinet members also reviewed legislation in the 2008-09 cycle. They strongly supported proposals to reduce the number of games in the baseball season from 56 to 52. Members felt that the amount of class time missed to accommodate the 56 games in a 13-week season was egregious. One member in fact called the current practice “an affront to academic integrity.”

Other proposals the cabinet discussed include:

• Proposal No. 2008-21, requiring the Eligibility Center to provide academic data, initial-eligibility standards and the banned-drug list among other information to prospective student-athletes and their parents. Cabinet members supported the legislation with a modification that requires the generic information (like the banned-drug list) to be provided when the prospect registers with the Eligibility Center and the institution-specific information when the prospect is on an institutional request list.

• Proposal No. 2008-36, allowing credits earned during terms in which an international-competition waiver is used to satisfy progress-toward-degree requirements. The cabinet supported the proposal

• Proposal No. 2008-37, eliminating the church-mission exception to the transfer-residence requirement. The cabinet supported the proposal.

• Proposal No. 2008-39, allowing a conference’s all-star team to compete in up to two contests against the U.S. Women’s Ice Hockey Team in the 12 months before the Olympics. The cabinet recommended a modification requiring that participating student-athletes be academically eligible at the time of competition and noted that no other viable competition is readily available and that women’s ice hockey teams generally have solid Academic Progress Rates.

• Proposal Nos. 2008-32 and 35, creating regulations for nontraditional coursework. The cabinet modified both proposals to require that enrollment in such nontraditional courses be considered as regular course enrollment for all students.

• Proposal No. 2008-34, allowing prospects with diagnosed education-impacting disabilities to complete three core courses after the graduation of his or her regular high school class. The cabinet supported the proposal.

• Proposal No. 2008-60, specifying that the membership process may be delayed or denied to prospective Division I members (reclassifying from Division II or provisional) if they are subject to penalties of the Academic Performance Program. The cabinet supported the proposal, believing that a strong academic component should be part of Division I membership requirements.