Report of the Division I Men?s Basketball
Academic Enhancement Group
Participants:
Percy Bates,
Jack Evans,
Cory Groth,
Walter Harrison,
Alan Hauser, Appalachian
Mike Slive, Southeastern Conference
Steve Weber,
Debbie Yow,
S. David Berst, NCAA
Myles Brand, NCAA
Julie, Cromer, NCAA
Kevin Lennon, NCAA
Steve Mallonee, NCAA
Todd
Petr, NCAA
[NOTE:
Committee members Gretchen Bataille,
NCAA
staff members Gary Brown, Bernard Franklin, Tom Jernstedt, Greg Shaheen,
The
Division I Men?s Basketball Academic Enhancement convened in
(1) Reviewed the charge of the Division I Men?s
Basketball Academic Enhancement Group as follows:
?
Analyze available
data, research and literature regarding the academic performance trends of
Division I men?s basketball student-athletes
?
Identify
characteristics and factors in the sport that may be serving to impair the
academic performance of Division I men?s basketball student-athletes
?
Identify changes
that would enhance academic performance and graduation rates in Division I
men?s basketball
?
*Submit to the
Division I Board of Directors, no later than the end of 2008, a set of
recommendations and proposals that would enhance the Academic Performance Rate
[APR] and graduation rates in Division I men?s basketball
?
Maintain ongoing
communication with, and seek reactions from, the NCAA governance structure, the
NABC membership and conference offices during the course of the project
2. Reviewed and analyzed data related to the
academic performance of men?s basketball s-as, including academic outcomes
related to transferring, trends in initial academic preparation and college
academic outcomes and trends in graduation success rate and academic progress
rate
3. Identified focus areas for the potential
development of recommendations to improve the academic performance of men?s
basketball s-a for consideration by the Division I Board of Directors;
Approved a motion to divide the groups into subgroups to more efficiently and effectively
accomplish the goals and objectives as set forth in the group?s charge. The
staff identified the following subgroups after the meeting:
?
Transfers --
Both Incoming and Outgoing Transfers. Impact on retention and eligibility points. Should
a program lose a retention point if the transferring student-athlete in good
academic standing? Should the
student-athlete transferring to another
institution be
required to achieve a specific requisite GPA to receive financial aid? Should
academic standards for incoming transfers, particularly 2-4 transfers be
strengthened? Should a year of
residence be imposed on all 2-4 transfers?
?
0 for 2 Phenomenon. Impact of the pursuit of professional
careers, evaluate anecdotal data that a significantly high percentage of
student-athletes pursue or realize professional playing careers, evaluate
waivers for those who depart institution after the final season [eighth
semester issue], gather data (i.e. short survey) related to reasons for 0 for
2s and
of student-athletes? perceptions. Review possible impact of coaching
changes. How can academic improvement plans help? Deliver
information to CAP and other subcommittees for consideration.
?
Academic
Preparation and Academic Support. Review issues related better
academic preparedness prior to collegiate enrollment (remedial/developmental
courses, selected academic red shirts, use of courses beyond high school), Consider
work of the ?at risk? committee in the consideration of recommendations.
Should it be mandatory for institutions to provide summer financial
assistance to attend summer school before initial year and thereafter? Should it be a Division I membership
requirement? Are institutions providing
appropriate levels of academic support services [e.g., academic tutoring/study
halls, academic personnel on road trips]?
Should institutions be able to provide former student-athletes
athletically related financial aid beyond six years? What are resource
challenges? Does the five-year academic plan common in football have value in
basketball or should basketball earn a fifth season?
?
Coach/Player Relationships.
Should
coaches be allowed greater access to prospects to assist with better
decision-making and to establish mentoring relationships? How can we counteract nonscholastic
influences that are impacting prospective student-athletes and their
educational commitment at the high school level? Would modifications of summer evaluation
periods help the problem? Will greater access post enrollment during
the summer impact academic performance positively? Should some period of skill instruction be
allowed in the summer? Should skill instruction
be eliminated after the Final Four until the end of the academic year with
comparable allowances for the summer? Should a coach?s lifetime APR record be
maintained? Should coaches be help
accountable for graduation rates and how? Would an access reward system help?
?
Playing and
Practice Seasons. Should changes be made to
the length of the season, maximum contest limits, maximum weekly contests, days
when competition can occur, missed class time, national schedules?
# #
# # #