The NCAA News - News and Features

January 20, 1997

Group sues NCAA over initial-eligibility rules

A lawsuit claiming that NCAA initial-eligibility rules discriminate on the basis of race was filed January 8 in a federal district court in Philadelphia.

The class-action suit, Cureton v. NCAA, was filed on behalf of Tai Kwan Cureton and Leatrice Shaw, who ranked 27th and fifth, respectively, in their high-school graduating class. The suit maintains that although both met the NCAA Division I core-course standard with high grade-point averages, neither achieved the required standardized-test score.

Cureton currently is a student at Wheaton College, where he is a member of the basketball team. Shaw attends the University of Miami (Florida), where she is a member of the track team.

The lawsuit was brought by Trial Lawyers for Public Justice (TLPJ), which describes itself as a public-interest law firm "dedicated to using trial lawyers' skills and resources to advance the public good." In recent years, it has represented a number of women student-athletes in several Title IX suits, including a prominent recent case involving Brown University.

Standardized tests have been part of the NCAA's Division I initial-eligibility standards since 1986, when Proposition 48 became effective. Proposition 48 was based on the premise that the best predictor of academic success was a combination of grade-point average and test score. Previously, NCAA eligibility was determined through high-school grade-point average.

The 1983 Convention adopted Proposition 48 after a series of academic scandals involving college athletes. After the standard became effective in 1986, graduation rates among Division I student-athletes began to rise.

At the beginning, the percentage of student-athletes who were minorities fell, but a recent NCAA study indicated that the percentage of minority participants has returned almost to the point where it was before the standards became effective.

In 1992, the membership adopted Proposal No. 16, which increased the number of required core courses and established a higher standardized-test score for prospective student-athletes with lower grade-point averages. Proposition 16 standards became fully effective in August 1996, so no data on the effects of that legislation are available yet.

"Before the eligibility standards," NCAA Chief Operating Officer Daniel Boggan Jr. said, "some student-athletes, including minority student-athletes, were brought onto campuses solely for their athletics ability, with little chance for them to graduate.

"Trial Lawyers for Public Justice, with its lawsuit, is advocating a return to the bad old days when student-athletes could spend four years representing an NCAA member institution in athletics and leaving not only with no diploma but without any real education at all."

Charles Whitcomb, faculty athletics representative at San Jose State University and chair of the NCAA Minority Opportunities and Interests Committee, cited why the rules were established.

"The standards were put in place because of our concern about graduation rates for student-athletes, including minority athletes," he said. "And, in fact, as a result of the standards, more African-American student-athletes graduate each year than did before the standards."

Lawyers for the plaintiffs say that the NCAA's use of an absolute standard exceeds the practice used by most universities in their admissions process.

"The NCAA's use of a fixed cut-off score on the SAT or ACT is completely unjustified," said TLPJ attorney David Schoen. "Colleges do not even use fixed cut-off scores to determine admissions. The NCAA's reliance on this one-size-fits-all cut-off score arbitrarily denies athletic opportunities for African-American students."

NCAA Executive Director Cedric W. Dempsey noted, however, that the Association's rules are limited in their effect.

"The standards do not affect whether a student-athlete can be admitted to any institution or study there," he said. "They only affect whether a student-athlete can compete on an intercollegiate level during their freshman year in Division I or II. In fact, both plaintiffs in this lawsuit are attending college now despite not meeting the standards."

The lawsuit asks the court to provide an injunction that would prohibit the NCAA from enforcing the minimum test-score requirement and would allow all affected student-athletes to regain a fourth year of athletics eligibility.