REPORT OF THE FEBRUARY 19-21, 2003, MEETING OF THE

Summer 2004 Student-athlete completes six credit hours.

Fall 2004 Student-athlete completes 12 credit hours.

Student-athlete A is subject to the 24/36-credit-hour requirement prior to the beginning of the spring 2005 term and meets the requirement based on completion of 30 total credit hours. Student-athlete A is also subject to the 18/27-credit-hour requirement at the same time and meets the requirement based on completion of 24 hours during the spring and fall 2004 semesters.

Student B

Fall 2003 Student-athlete initially enrolls full-time and completes 12 hours.

Spring 2004 Student-athlete does not enroll. (Missed term exception may be applied for nine hours.)

Summer 2004 Student-athlete completes six hours.

Student-athlete B is subject to the 24/36-credit-hour requirement prior to the beginning of the fall 2004 term and meets the requirement based on completion of 27 hours (with the missed-term exception). Student-athlete B is also subject to the 18/27-credit-hour requirement at the same time and meets the requirement based on completion of 21 hours (with the missed term exception).

Student C

Fall 2003 Student-athlete initially enrolls full-time and completes 12 hours.

Spring 2004 Student-athlete completes 12 hours.

Student-athlete C is subject to the 24/36-credit-hour requirement prior to the beginning of the fall 2004 term and meets the requirement based on completion of 24 hours. Student-athlete C is also subject to the 18/27-credit-hour requirement at the same time and meets the requirement based on completion of 24 hours.

Fall 2004 Student-athlete enrolls part-time and completes three credit hours.

Spring 2005 Student-athlete enrolls part-time and completes six credit hours.

Fall 2005 Student-athlete enrolls full-time.

Student-athlete C is subject the 18/27-credit-hour requirement and meets the requirement based on completion of 24 hours during the 2003-04 academic year.

(d) Budget Impact. None.

(2) Modification of Proposal No. 02-23 (as amended by 02-23-2) Regarding Application to Student-Athletes Who Do Not Meet the 24/36-Credit-Hour Requirement.

(a) Recommendation. The cabinet, at the request of the academic consultants, unanimously recommends that the Management Council use its authority pursuant to NCAA Constitution 5.4.1.1.1 to modify the wording of Proposal No. 02-23 consistent with its intent to specify that a student-athlete who does not meet the 24/36-credit-hour requirement (prior to the beginning of the institution’s third semester/fourth quarter following the student-athlete’s initial, full-time enrollment) may become eligible at the beginning of the next academic term by earning the number of hours needed to total 24-semester or 36-quarter hours during the two previous semesters or three previous quarters.

(b) Rationale. This modification is consistent with current legislation, which permits a student-athlete who does not meet satisfactory-progress requirements at the beginning of a term to regain eligibility the subsequent term.

Student A

Fall 2003 Student-athlete initially enrolls full-time and completes six hours.

Spring 2004 Student-athlete completes 12 hours.

Summer 2004 Student-athlete completes three hours.

Student-athlete A is subject to the 24/36-credit-hour requirement prior to the beginning of the fall 2004 term and does not meet the requirement based on completion of 21 hours.

Fall 2004 Student-athlete completes nine hours.

Student-athlete A may regain eligibility at the beginning of the spring 2005 term by earning enough credit hours to total 24 credit hours earned in the previous two semesters. Student-athlete A meets the requirement based on completion of 24 credit hours.

(d) Budget Impact. None.

(3) Modification of Proposal No. 02-23 (as amended by 02-23-2) Regarding Use of Part-Time Hours.

(a) Recommendation. The cabinet, at the request of the academic consultants, unanimously recommends that the Management Council use its authority pursuant to Constitution 5.4.1.1.1 to modify the wording of Proposal No. 02-23 consistent with its intent to eliminate NCAA Bylaw 14.4.3.1.2, which currently precludes student-athletes using hours earned while enrolled on a part-time basis to meet credit-hour requirements unless the student-athlete is held accountable for the term.

(b) Rationale. Based on the application of Proposal No. 02-23 (as amended by 02-23-2) related to the credit-hour requirement, the current legislation regarding use of part-time hours is no longer applicable. The new progress-toward-degree credit-hour requirements are not based on the number of terms of attendance (i.e., averaging method) but are based on earning a requisite number of credit hours each academic year. Thus, it is permissible to use hours earned while enrolled on a part-time basis to satisfy the applicable credit-hour requirements under any circumstance. As a result, Bylaw 14.4.3.1.2 should be removed for clarity.

(4) Proposal No. 03-25 – Progress-Toward-Degree – Minimum Grade-Point-Average Requirements.

(a) Recommendation. The cabinet, at the request of the academic consultants, recommends that the Management Council sponsor Proposal No. 03-25 to require an institution to certify the requisite minimum cumulative grade-point average set forth in Proposal No. 02-24-B on a term-by-term basis. Institutions shall certify the grade-point-average requirement by the first date of competition of the academic term (for which eligibility is being certified). [For 23, against, 11, abstain 4]

(b) Rationale. The NCAA Division I Board of Directors requested that the Management Council develop additional legislation that would require institutions to verify grade-point averages more than once each year to strengthen the progress-toward-degree requirements recently adopted by the membership. While there was some support among the academic consultants for “phasing-in” the term-by-term grade-point-average requirement to allow time for student-athletes to adapt to the new standards, the consultants cited the success of some conferences that currently employ similar rules, as well as an interest in facilitating – rather than delaying – the expected behavior modification that will follow the implementation of the new standards. Also, it should be noted that this requirement is not applicable until after a student-athlete has completed his or her first academic year, which allows freshman student-athletes time to adjust to the rigors of collegiate study. Finally, concerns related to the detrimental impact of one term of sub-par academic performance by a particular student-athlete should be alleviated by the use of a cumulative grade-point average to meet the requirement, rather than the term grade-point average, and the fact that student-athletes will not be subject to the requirement until their second year of enrollment.

(5) Proposal No. 03-26 – Initial Eligibility – Core-Course Requirements.

(a) Recommendation. The cabinet, at the request of the academic consultants, recommends that the Management Council sponsor Proposal No. 03-26 to increase the total number of required core-course units for initial eligibility from 14 to 16. The two additional core course units shall include one unit of math and one unit in any core area. [For 35, against 1, abstain 2]

(b) Rationale. The cabinet and the academic consultants believe that exposure to core academic classes results in students better prepared to take the SAT or ACT and better prepared for the demands of college coursework. As a result, the cabinet and the academic consultants believe this legislation to increase core-course requirements would enhance the academic success of student-athletes at both the collegiate and high-school levels. Further, research indicates that the number of courses taken in math are statistically significant predictors of graduation among males and that the number of courses taken in “other” areas is as strong a predictor of graduation as test scores. Although the recommendation is to require one additional unit of math and one additional unit in any core area, some support existed among the academic consultants for further specification to require the 16th core course unit to be completed in either foreign language or science. Also, the consultants stressed the need to engage the secondary school community in the implementation of this legislation and noted that advance public notice of the effective date will be crucial to its success. In that regard, the cabinet and the academic consultants suggest that this increase be effective within four years of notification to the membership and secondary school population, either the 2007-08 or the 2008-09 academic year, depending on the legislative cycle. If adopted, this legislation would raise the core-course requirement as follows:

English 4

Math 3

Natural/Physical Science 2

English, Math or Natural/Physical Science 1

Social Science 2

Additional/Any core area 4

TOTAL 16

b. Legislative – Financial Aid Deregulation Proposals.

(1) Proposal No. 03-23 – Financial Aid – Countable Financial Aid – Team Limits.

(a) Recommendation. The cabinet unanimously recommends that the Management Council sponsor Proposal No. 03-23, which exempts the following sources of institutional nonathletics financial aid from the institution’s team limits in the applicable sport:

i. Institutional academic scholarships, awarded independently of athletics interests and awarded in a consistent manner for all students, provided the recipient has completed at least one year in college and achieve a cumulative grade-point-average of 3.300 (on a 4.000 scale) for all academic work completed during the student’s collegiate enrollment resulting in degree credits at the awarding institution.

ii. Need-based institutional aid, not based in any degree on athletics ability and awarded based on federal methodology (e.g., methodology for determining Pell eligibility).

(b) Rationale. Under this proposal, academic awards and other academic scholarships and need-based aid will be excluded from the institution’s team limits (but will continue to count toward the recipient’s individual limit). Such financial aid is not related in any manner to athletics ability or participation and, thus, should not count in the institution’s team limits in the applicable sport. Student-athletes should have the opportunity to receive financial aid unrelated to athletics ability or participation without adversely impacting the student-athlete’s team financial aid limitations. The exclusion of such awards from the team limits will reward academic excellence and be responsive to need. It will also provide more financial opportunities for qualified student-athletes who otherwise are unable to receive the maximum amount of athletically and academically related aid or need-based aid for which they qualify. This proposal does not change current legislated exemptions such as the academic honor awards and honorary academic awards/research grants. Finally, this proposal is not intended to change how minimum financial-aid requirements may be met related to the Division I membership requirements.

(2) Proposal No. 02-82 – Financial Aid – Counters.

(a) Recommendation. The cabinet unanimously recommends that the Management Council sponsor Proposal No. 02-82, as revised, to specify that a student-athlete becomes a counter when he or she receives institutional financial aid based on athletics ability, educational expenses awarded by the U.S. Olympic Committee or a U.S. national governing body (or, for international student-athletes, expenses awarded by the equivalent organization of a foreign country) or, for recruited student-athletes, outside financial aid for which athletics participation is a major criterion.

(b) Rationale. This proposal is the result of simplification efforts of the NCAA Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet Subcommittee on Financial Aid. This proposal sets forth three simple criteria to evaluate when determining the counter status of a student-athlete. It does not complicate monitoring of nonrecruited student-athletes in that it maintains current legislation relating to the counter status of a recruited student-athlete who receives outside aid for which athletics participation is a major criterion. Further, the proposal also will minimize the impact that current legislation has on a recruited football or basketball student-athlete who only receives institutional financial aid unrelated to athletics and becomes a counter upon participation in varsity competition. By eliminating these bylaws, the application of the counter legislation is simplified.

(3) Proposal No. 02-83-A – Financial Aid – Individual Limits.

(a) Recommendation. The cabinet unanimously recommends that the Management Council sponsor Proposal No. 02-83-A, which specifies that a student-athlete’s individual limit is the cost of attendance and that a student-athlete may receive institutional financial aid based on athletics ability, outside financial aid for which athletics participation is a major criterion and educational expenses awarded by the U.S. Olympic Committee or a U.S. national governing body (or, for international student-athletes, expenses awarded by the equivalent organization of a foreign country) up to the value of a full grant-in-aid, plus any other financial aid unrelated to athletics ability up to cost of attendance; or the value of a full grant-in-aid plus a Pell Grant, whichever is greater.

(b) Rationale. This proposal is the result of the deregulation efforts of the Subcommittee on Financial Aid. The subcommittee believes that every student-athlete should have the opportunity to receive financial aid to cover his or her cost of attendance through a combination of permissible sources of financial aid, similar to the financial aid limit for students generally. As a general rule, this proposal will not impact athletics budgets because a student-athlete may not receive athletically related financial aid in excess of a full grant-in-aid.

c. Legislative – Other Proposals.

(1) Proposal No. 02-17 (as amended by 2002-17-1) – Amateurism – Professional Draft – Division I-A and Division I-AA Football.

(a) Recommendation. The cabinet unanimously recommends that the Management Council use its authority pursuant to Constitution 5.4.1.1.1 to modify Proposal No. 02-17 (as amended by 02-17-1) based on its intent to apply only to the National Football League (NFL) draft.

(b) Rationale. The original intent of Proposal No. 2002-17 (as amended by 2002-17-1) was to permit student-athletes to declare for the NFL draft, inasmuch as that league is the only professional football league that allows student-athletes to declare for the draft.