National Collegiate Athletic Association

NCAA News Archive - 2010

back to 2010 | Back to NCAA News Archive Index

Jun 19, 2010 10:20:59 AM

The Division II Presidents Council dealt with unfinished business from April by agreeing Friday to sponsor legislation that would change how nontraditional courses are to be certified for initial-eligibility purposes.

At the same time, the Council opened new vistas for the Life in the Balance initiative and membership-growth matters during a rare June meeting.

The initial-eligibility proposal, which had been tabled after lengthy discussion at the Council's April meeting, will mirror already-approved Division I legislation by requiring nontraditional high school courses to meet the following requirements to be countable as core courses:

• The instructor and the student must have regular interaction with one another for the purposes of teaching, evaluating and assisting the student throughout the duration of the course.
• The student's work (such as exams, papers and other assignments) must be available for review and validation.
• A defined period for completion of the course must be stated.

The presidents, who met in conjunction with the Division II Chancellors and Presidents Summit, chose to move forward with the proposal after hearing a presentation from Stillman College President Ernest McNealey and NCAA Eligibility Center representatives Lisa Mills and Nick Sproull.

While the presidents continued to harbor some of the same concerns they expressed in April, they were persuaded that the proposed change would help address potential abuses with initial eligibility for athletics. Members of the Council were pleased to hear that educational experts on nontraditional learning endorse the NCAA approach and, in fact, sit on two NCAA committees charged with oversight of the issue.

Life in the Balance

The conversation about Phase II of Division II's Life in the Balance was more complicated, morphing from a straightforward presentation of Phase II proposals into a larger discussion of the values of the division.

Of the Balance proposals that were advanced, the presidents seemed most interested in modifications to the 20/8 rule that would permit two hours of full-team practice in the outside the playing season time period preceding the championships segment and agreed that further conversation on that concept is needed.

Student-athletes Rose Broderick of Northern Kentucky and Brooke Baker of Grand Canyon urged the presidents to keep an eye on the "athlete" part of the student-athlete experience and emphasized the importance of skill instruction, full team interaction and the nonchampionship segment.

The presidents valued the input and did not endorse or oppose any concept that was advanced. Those proposals, along with other Bylaw 17 matters that don't fit under Life in the Balance, will be considered at the Management Council's July 19-20 meeting and on the President Council's August 12 conference call.

Whatever the outcome of the matters under consideration, the presidents were concerned that the scope of Phase II seemed small compared to the Phase I legislation that was approved in January.

"I don't want to fight every battle to win the war," said one president.

Another noted the complexity of the terminology of the proposals in the Phase II. "It's revealing how much clarification is needed for the people in this room," he said. "We don't want to create a rolling stone of Phase II and Phase III legislation that no one understands."

Ultimately, the presidents sought to create a longer view on Life in the Balance. Some presidents counseled caution in not "going overboard," drawing parallels between students who value their athletics experience and those who enjoy theater or music. "Let's recognize we have students across our campuses who are fully engaged," one president said.

At the same time, others were aware of potential damage to the January legislation, with one president expressing concern about legislative erosion to Life in the Balance that could lead to the "creation of a second season," complete with unwanted additional time demands on student-athletes and unwanted additional costs that were much of the reason for the original review.

The takeaway was that Life in the Balance now should be regarded in three phases, with Phase II being refinement and Phase III being a continuous assessment and evaluation to determine the effects of what has been implemented.

The presidents also appeared interested in pushing conferences to play a larger role in lowering ever-expanding athletics costs.

Presidents Council chair Drew Bogner of Molloy College agreed with an observation that all Division II policy and legislation eventually should be viewed through the Life in the Balance lens, calling it Division II's "value construct."

Membership

The membership discussion involved new conference member requirements and the potential growth and expansion of Division II overall.

University of the Sciences President Phil Gerbino, speaking on behalf of the Division II Membership Committee, alerted the Council to the possibility of a consistent expansion of Division II membership that could tax the division's finite resources and affect championships access for existing members.

A total of 17 institutions currently are in various stages of the Division II membership process. The Membership Committee restricts that number to no more than 30 at any one time.

Various presidents noted that Division II membership potentially faces pressure from all directions, with current Division I, Division III and NAIA members possibly choosing to affiliate for different reasons over the next decade.

Currently, there are 22 Division II conferences, and the Membership Committee has informally identified a ceiling of 25. Gerbino noted that the Membership Committee is encouraging expansion of existing conferences but said that the approach is not really a long-term solution. The governance structure does not control the creation of conferences.

To put the division on the road to a plan, the presidents urged a study of membership matters that would (1) seek to achieve greater understanding of current conference discussions regarding membership and possible expansion, (2) identify strategic priorities in this area and (3) consider the ramifications of what expansion does occur.

The presidents encouraged a study that would model various possibilities, such as the budgetary effects of more conferences, more members, or more conferences with more members. Effects on championships access also would be evaluated.

Division II Vice President Mike Racy said the staff, possibly in concert with a consultant, would begin work on the matter immediately. Initially, the information will go to the Long Range Projections Task Force (recently formed to look at a budget framework for the division for the next 10-14 years), the Membership Committee and the Presidents Council for review and action.

The presidents also gave the Membership Committee permission to explore a requirement that prospective Division II members must have a conference invitation in hand before applying.