National Collegiate Athletic Association

NCAA News Archive - 2010

back to 2010 | Back to NCAA News Archive Index

Jun 9, 2010 1:57:30 PM

While the Academic Performance Program has proven largely successful, the Committee on Academic Performance is not taking the opportunity to pat itself on the back. Instead, the group is embarking on an extensive review of the entire program, including the penalty structure, filters and Academic Progress Rate benchmarks.

"It's just really good practice," said Committee on Academic Performance chair Walter Harrison, president at Hartford. "We started this program from scratch. We've had it long enough that we can see whether we're actually accomplishing goals. It strikes me as a perfect time to review the whole program."

The CAP has continuously refined and improved the Academic Performance Program, but this will be the first comprehensive look at the program and its effect since its inception six years ago.

Many CAP members view it as an important opportunity. Data can show the impact of penalties on institutions that received them. For the first time, graduation performance can be related to the APR performance of the same student-athletes. An evaluation of the current APR formula and penalty structure, particularly as it relates to improving graduation opportunities, will be a focus for the committee this year.

Because of various adjustments in the rate, including an accommodation for student-athletes who leave school eligible to become professional in their chosen sport, and a more far-reaching change allowing student-athletes with a grade-point average of 2.6 or higher to transfer without costing their team an APR point, the meaning of the penalty benchmarks in relation to projected graduation rates may have changed.

"(The adjustments we made) were good and fair to institutions, but they may have impacted how we should interpret APR scores," said Harrison. "A 925 may not mean what it used to."

Another part of the CAP's work will be in concert with the Academic Cabinet. The two groups meet together later this month to talk about initial-eligibility standards and the academic performance of student-athletes who transfer from two-year institutions. APR and graduation-rate data show that two-year transfers are less likely to be academically successful and ultimately graduate than any other cohort.

Tom Burnett, commissioner of the Southland Conference and a CAP member, said some of the institutions in his conference have struggled with APR issues because of the high numbers of two-year college transfers they recruit.

"We took our chances with them and probably paid an academic price," he said. "Our decisions have gotten a little more complex, more than just a coach saying, ‘I want this student-athlete enrolled.' You really can't take the chances you took before. You've got to bring in student-athletes who can do the work and make progress toward degrees. I think our schools have done that."

But a moratorium on junior-college transfers in Division I is unrealistic. Harrison said that the cabinet and the CAP will be looking into whether a new set of transfer requirements might be in order.

One of the ideas on the table is a "year in academic readiness" that would require two-year transfers with a certain academic profile to sit out a year of competition to focus on academics. Members of the two-year college community have floated the idea that the year be spent at their institutions. This idea and others are among those that will be more fully vetted in the coming months. The cabinet is continuing to work with officials from two-year institutions and their athletics organizations to address the issue. CAP will be involved in the conversations, as well.

"I don't know what the answers will be," Harrison said. "But I'm looking forward to a thoughtful discussion this summer."

Pete Boone, a CAP member and athletics director at Mississippi, will leave the committee after its summer 2010 meeting. But he cautioned his colleagues to take their time with any further changes to the APP. People know the penalty benchmarks and are familiar with the system, he said, and any change in those numbers should be well-thought-out and backed by data.

"(Former) NCAA President Myles Brand said, ‘We want to change cultures.' That has been done and is being done," Boone said. "As long as that is the case, I hope we don't keep piling on things that make people come to a point of frustration and say, ‘It's not worth it.' I hope everyone is patient."

Burnett also counseled patience and a reliance on the numbers. He said the "general good feeling" everyone has about changed behavior must be matched with specific, meaningful data.

"We need to be sure we are moving forward with the right mechanism," he said. "What we do now is going to affect people for many years to come."