DENVER – Division III institutions now are free to use such media as Facebook and Twitter to publicize game results and other athletics news without worrying whether prospective student-athletes are receiving those “electronically transmitted” messages, provided the communication meets some new objective guidelines established by the Division III Management Council.

The Council agreed this week, in chair Lynn Oberbillig’s word, to “liberalize” 2008 legislation that has prohibited sending any electronically transmitted correspondence other than an e-mail or fax – including any type of message via social-networking media – to prospects.

Council members approved the recommendation from the Division III Interpretations and Legislation Committee as noncontroversial legislation and also approved the language of the revised bylaw, meaning that it became effective Tuesday upon adjournment of the Council’s summer meeting.

The Council also made application of the new standard retroactive to August 2008, when the original legislation became effective. That action relieves schools of the requirement to report violations in cases where prospects may have received information available to anyone seeking it via social media.

Institutions and coaches still are prohibited from using social-networking media, as well as such tools as texting or instant messaging, to communicate personally with a specific prospect. Communication with prospects via phone, e-mail and fax continues to be permitted.

The Division III Student-Athlete Advisory Committee, a prime force behind adoption of the 2008 legislation because of its stance that recruiting via electronic technology should be neither intrusive nor informal, supported the change. SAAC representatives on the Council said the original legislation’s intent is preserved by the revised bylaw’s requirement that prospects must be given the ability to decline receipt or “unsubscribe” from receiving information from an institution.

“Our original worry was with single text messages, which we felt were unprofessional and placed undue, one-on-one pressure on a student-athlete,” said Erin Wojtkun of Christopher Newport, one of SAAC’s two Management Council members.

“We felt the restrictions in the new legislation, with no one-on-one contact and that it’s general in nature, makes it a prospective student-athlete’s choice to receive the message. We decided (social networking) is a new technology and it’s how new students are getting information. So, we don’t want to close it off, because we want as many Division III athletes as possible to learn what it really means to be a Division III athlete.”

The revised bylaw does not specify the types of information that may be transmitted by institutions, simply terming it “general athletics information.” But the Interpretations and Legislation Committee has suggested that it is the same type of information available to the public through a school’s Web site, such as “general media reports, scores and other public information.”

Membership-requirement penalties

Council members also decided to take the noncontroversial-legislation route in dealing with a recommendation from the Division III Membership Committee to revise how penalties are applied for institutions’ failure to comply with membership requirements.

The Council approved imposing a probation period half as long or less than currently required for violations of membership standards, although the new penalty structure will not go into effect until after the Council reviews and approves legislative language at its October meeting. The decision also is subject to review by the Division III Presidents Council.

The new penalties would put the greatest emphasis on membership requirements that are tied most directly to the Division III philosophy statement – those dealing with sports sponsorship.

An institution’s first failure to comply with those requirements, including minimums for student-athlete participation and contests as well as the minimum number of sponsored sports, would result in a five-year probation period. Other violations of standards designed to support institutional awareness of Division III’s philosophy and rules – specifically, failure to complete the Institutional Self-Study Guide, failure to attend the NCAA Convention annually or failure to attend an NCAA Regional Rules Seminar at least once every three years – would result in a three-year probation.

Currently, a first violation of any of those requirements results in a 10-year probation period. The recommendation to reduce the length of probation periods resulted from concerns expressed by the Management Council about whether a 10-year period was appropriate for the types of violations being committed.

“We’ve recently had a whole host of new membership requirements, including attendance at the Convention and Regional Rules Seminars, and a 10-year probationary period seemed pretty harsh for those kinds of violations of membership duties,” Oberbillig said. “The Council was very interested in finding some middle ground to say, these are serious matters and we want to draw your attention to them, but we don’t think it’s a 10-year problem.

“We’re very happy with a five-year probationary period for sports-sponsorship neglect, because that’s the most serious violation. We believe in broad-based participation, and if schools aren’t meeting what’s now a five-and-five (men’s and women’s sports) requirement and next year will be a six-and-six requirement, that should come with a harsher penalty.”

Once the Council gives final approval to the new penalty structure, any institution that has been penalized for a failure to comply with requirements will have the length of its probation period reduced in accordance with the violation.

The Council also supported the Membership Committee’s intent to make more use of waiver and appeals processes to deal with unique circumstances that might either mitigate a violation or justify reconsideration of a penalty.

Penalties will remain the same for second and third violations of a membership requirement during a probation period. A second violation can result in restricted membership – involving the loss of such membership benefits as access to championships and grant funds – and a third violation can result in an institution being placed in corresponding membership.

Other actions

In other actions during its July 20-21 meeting, the Council:

• Endorsed a recommendation from the Division III Infractions Appeals Committee, which currently includes only members of the Presidents and Management Councils as members, to change the committee’s composition to include one Management Council member, one Presidents Council member, two other members representing the Division III membership, and one “public” member from outside the division’s membership. The Council also directed that at least one director of athletics serve on the committee. The action was taken to ensure that the committee includes members who have experience with or an understanding of administrative hearing processes and procedures.
• Approved recommendations from the Division III Strategic Planning and Finance committee to require use of Tier Two funds in the Strategic Initiatives Grant Program for “integration institutes,” and to provide more flexibility in how funds are applied to the institutes as well as to the required programming topics of student-athlete well-being and community service, sportsmanship, and diversity and gender equity. The Council also approved funding for professional-development initiatives for minority athletics administrators and approved an increase in funding for such programming for faculty athletics representatives and conference sports information directors.
• Asked the Committee on Women’s Athletics to consider conducting research on Division III institutions’ interest in sponsoring sand volleyball as a women’s sport.
• Responded to the NCAA Executive Committee’s request for input on whether championships hosting opportunities should be awarded in states that permit sports wagering, recommending that such opportunities should be denied only in championships in which sites are predetermined and should not be denied to schools that earn the opportunity to host during a season. Council members also agreed that any ban on hosting opportunities should apply statewide.