Efforts to enhance presidential leadership and explore the possibility of monitoring student-athlete graduation rates to determine academic performance gained momentum this week.

Council members discussed various ways to help presidents provide more strategic leadership for Division III and agreed to consider specific changes in legislation or Council policies that would help achieve that objective.

The discussion stems from the first in a series of “white papers” addressing membership issues that the Council authored last fall. White Paper No. 1 focused on achieving greater presidential leadership in Division III, and the subject was identified by Council leaders as a priority this year.

In addition to proposing for the 2010 Convention an amendment to the Division III philosophy statement supporting presidential leadership for athletics at the national, conference and campus levels (an idea the Council will revisit later this year), the white paper suggests several other approaches.

Among policy-based ideas the presidents agreed to review further this summer:

•         Establish a “presidential grouping” of legislative proposals that is more narrowly focused on strategic, rather than operational, concepts – thus helping institutional presidents identify key issues at the annual Convention.

•         Collaborate with the Division III Management Council through a designated screening group to identify legislative proposals or concepts that should be reviewed by the Presidents Council, thus helping the presidents to focus on strategic issues.

•         Regularly schedule planning sessions on the night before quarterly Presidents Council meetings, to permit giving more attention to strategic concerns and key issues.

The Council also agreed to consider approaches that would involve changes in Division III legislation:

•         Eliminate the requirement that the Presidents Council must sponsor any legislative proposal arising from the Division III governance structure, allowing the Management Council to develop and sponsor proposals addressing operational issues.

•         Propose that legislative provisions addressing core Division III ideals, such as the prohibition on athletics aid, be designated as “division dominant,” requiring a two-thirds vote of the membership for further revision.

•         More accurately label “noncontroversial” legislation presented in the Convention Official Notice as a “consent package” or other appropriate designation.

Council members will continue their discussion of steps to support presidential leadership during their August 6 meeting in Indianapolis.

In another action, the Council authorized proceeding with a pilot academic-reporting program to compare graduating rates of participating institutions’ student-athletes with the broader student body.

The idea of academic reporting (as detailed in this NCAA News article) stems from another “white paper,” this one addressing academic considerations. That paper called for Division III to consider “limited reporting” that “would emphasize the comparison of student-athlete and nonstudent-athlete data within institutions.” The idea is to support the division philosophy statement’s tenet that “academic performance of student-athletes is, at a minimum, consistent with that of the general student body.”

The purpose of the pilot is to determine the utility of establishing graduation as a standard of academic performance, assess the benefits of a reporting program and identify any burden such an effort might impose on Division III schools.

“Limited” reporting means that data would be collected only for informational purposes – primarily to enable institutions to monitor student-athlete graduation rates compared to the student body – and would not be used to establish minimum Division III academic standards or related penalties.

The Council also:

•         Approved championships budget recommendations (including an increase to $80 in championships per diem for 2009-10) previously endorsed by the Division III Championships Committee and Management Council.

•         Delayed until its August 6 meeting consideration of whether to sponsor legislative proposals forwarded from the Management Council’s spring meeting, in order to devote more time to discussion of a Division III identity initiative (see story in today’s NCAA News).