NCAA Minority Opportunities
And Interests Committee
Report on the use of
American Indian Mascots
in Intercollegiate Athletics
to the
NCAA Executive Committee
Subcommittee on Gender and Diversity Issues
October 2002
During its April
2001 meeting, the NCAA Executive Committee reviewed correspondence regarding
the use of American Indian mascots, nicknames and logos by NCAA member
institutions. While the
issue of American Indian mascots and images in college athletics has been the
subject of discussion for the past five years, three recent events prompted the
Executive Committee’s discussion:
1. The Executive Committee’s detailed review of issues related to the Confederate Battle Flag and its resulting criteria for evaluating NCAA predetermined championship sites. The criteria include, in part “the ability of a site to promote an atmosphere of respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person”. (Appendix A)
2. St. Cloud State University President Roy Saigo’s request to the Executive Committee to consider a resolution stating the NCAA does not condone the use of Native American logos and nicknames. (Appendix B)
3. The United States Commission on Civil Rights’ Statement on the use of Native American images and nicknames as sports symbols, stating in part, “Schools should not use their influence to perpetuate misrepresentations of any culture or people. Stereotypes of American Indians teach all students that stereotyping of minority groups is acceptable, a dangerous lesson in a diverse society.” (Appendix C)
The Executive Committee referred the review of the issue of eliminating the use of American Indian mascots, nicknames and logos by members of the NCAA to the Minority Opportunities and Interests Committee (MOIC) and the Executive Committee Subcommittee on Gender and Diversity Issues.
The MOIC reviewed and discussed this issue during its July 2001 meeting. In preparation for its discussion, the committee reviewed a variety of materials, including the NCAA Constitution, recent language issued by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, and varied articles and publications. In addition, Dr. Cornel Pewewardy, Department of Teaching and Leadership, School of Education, University of Kansas, provided a historical overview of American Indian mascot issues, including the use of American Indian culture as sports entertainment.
Upon completion of its initial review, the committee agreed that the use of American Indian mascots in intercollegiate athletics must be a concern to the NCAA. Specifically, the committee noted:
1. NCAA Constitution, Article 2.2.2 – Cultural Diversity and Gender Equity:
It is
the responsibility of each member institution to establish and maintain an environment
that values cultural diversity and gender equity among its student-athletes and
intercollegiate athletics department staff.
2. NCAA Constitution, Article 2.4 – The Principle of Sportsmanship and Ethical Conduct:
For intercollegiate
athletics to promote the character development of participants, to enhance the
integrity of higher education and to promote civility in society,
student-athletes, coaches, and all others associated with these athletics
programs and events should adhere to such fundamental values as respect,
fairness, civility, honesty and responsibility. These values should be manifest
not only in athletics participation but also in the broad spectrum of
activities affecting the athletics program.
3. NCAA
Constitution, Article 2.6 – The Principle of Nondiscrimination:
The
Association shall promote an atmosphere of respect for and sensitivity to the
dignity of every person. It is the
policy of the Association to refrain from discrimination with respect to its
governance policies, educational programs, activities and employment practices.
Based on its initial review, the MOIC noted that the issues related to the use of American Indian mascots are both historical and complex.
Due to the complexity of the issues surrounding the use of American Indian mascots in intercollegiate athletics, the MOIC developed a plan to further research the issues in order to provide the NCAA Executive Committee with informed recommendations. The committee identified the following areas to be addressed in its review:
1. Historical background of the issue.
2. Scope of the study. Is this issue solely related to mascots? Or, are there other areas that should be addressed, including logos, insignias, fight songs, names, and behaviors?
3. American Indian organizations, agencies and constituent groups that need to be involved in the discussion and resolution of the issue.
4. Issues and concerns from administrators, spectators and alumni at institutions that currently have American Indian mascots or names.
5. Information from administrators, spectators, and alumni at institutions that formerly had American Indian mascots or names.
6. Involvement of the NCAA committee structure. How does the MOIC engage the governance structure (e.g. the Committee on Sportsmanship and Ethical Conduct, Student-Athlete Advisory Committee) in the discussion of this issue?
7. Recommendations at the national, conference, and institutional levels.
The MOIC appointed a subcommittee to oversee its work. This subcommittee divided its work into two phases: The research phase and the recommendations phase. The subcommittee also established a timetable to serve as a guide for the subcommittee to complete its work. The timetable provided adequate opportunity to gather necessary information on issues and develop specific recommendations. The subcommittee’s timetable included discussion by the full committee during its September 24-26, 2001, and January 28-29, June 19-21, and September 23-25, 2002 meetings.
In considering
the research phase of the study, the MOIC determined that it would gather data,
opinions, and thoughts from a variety of sources. The MOIC gathered specific data on the number of NCAA member
institutions that use Native American mascots. The committee read and summarized many articles and pieces
of research regarding this topic.
Also, the committee solicited comments and testimonials from Indian
tribal groups and members, student-athletes, the NCAA membership, the general
public, and various entities within the NCAA governance structure.
Results and Discussion.
Summary of Results: NCAA
Member Institutions Currently Using American Indian Mascots.
Thirty-three
NCAA member institutions were identified as using a mascot or name typically
associated with American Indians.
A list of these institutions is attached as Appendix
D. Those institutions used the
following nicknames: Braves,
Indians, Warriors, Redmen, Chippewas, Seminoles, Fighting Illini, Choctaws,
Fighting Sioux, Aztecs, Chieftains, Utes, Tribe, and Otahkians. Some institutions used names associated
with American Indian culture, such as buffalo. The committee chose to include only those mascots that
conjure up the notion of a specific American Indian tribe or individual. The MOIC forwarded to each one of these
institutions a survey regarding the manner in which the current mascot affects
campus climate. The survey is
attached as Appendix E.
Discussion.
Twenty-seven institutions
(81 percent) completed and returned the campus climate survey. Of those, one institution had
previously changed to a non-Indian mascot and one university used the nickname
Warriors to depict a Greek soldier in full period combat attire. These institutions have been removed
from the list.
Of the
remaining 25 institutions, the most prevalent use of American Indian imagery
occurs in the use of nicknames (21 institutions), and logos (13
institutions). Seven
institutions reported use of an American Indian mascot.
At a number of
institutions, a variety of behaviors are associated with the use of the
identified mascots, nicknames and logos.
Some behaviors include: “authentic” war dances, ritual dances, war cries
by fans and spectators; throwing of a spear to signal celebration, the
“tomahawk chop” performed by cheerleaders, fans and spectators; use of face and
body paint by cheerleaders, band members and fans; and Indian chants by
cheerleaders, fans, and spectators.
Summary of Results: NCAA Member Institutions
Formerly Using American Indian Mascots.
Thirteen NCAA member institutions were identified as using a mascot or name typically associated with American Indians. A list of these institutions is attached as Appendix F. All three NCAA divisions have institutions that have changed their mascot from an American Indian to a non-Indian mascot. The MOIC contacted each of these institutions to obtain information outlining the reasons and methods used to select a new mascot or nickname. This information has been helpful as the committee developed recommendations.
Discussion.
Many
institutions that have retired American Indian mascots, nicknames and logos
have indicated the need for change stemmed from a recognition that an
inappropriate negative reference was extended to an entire group of
people. Institutions noted
the clear intentions to honor Native people were inconsistent with the
expressed concerns of American Indians, as well as community and campus
representatives.
While some institutions instituted a formal review and others an informal one, the common characteristics of institutions engaged in discontinuing the use of their mascot, nickname or logo included the involvement of American Indians in the discussions, the involvement of the student body, the use of a broad-based committee, and a final decision by the institution’s president or Board of Trustees.
Once a decision to retire the American Indian mascot was reached, most institutions involved the student body in the selection of a new mascot, nickname or logo.
Summary of Results: Student-Athlete Advisory
Committee (SAAC) Responses.
The MOIC sought comments from Division I, II, and III student-athletes through the divisional Student-Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC) distribution list. The Division I SAAC forwarded a response on behalf of the entire committee in addition to the comments from individual Division I student-athletes. The MOIC believes it is important to have comments from this segment of the membership because this issue directly impacts student-athletes through the potential of hostile playing environments and reduced access for championships.
The NCAA Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee voted to collectively support NCAA member institutions eliminating the use of American Indian mascots, nicknames, and logos. Fewer than 10 comments were received from student-athletes through the distribution list. One supported the elimination of American Indian mascots, two were undecided, and three were against the elimination of the mascots.
Summary
of Results: Responses From NCAA
Governance Structure.
The MOIC
requested the NCAA Committee on Sportsmanship and Ethical Conduct (CS&EC), the
Division I Championships and Competition Cabinet, the Division II Championships
Committee and the Division III Championships Committee provide comments on the
use of American Indian mascots in intercollegiate athletics.
Discussion.
CS&EC
urges all NCAA member institutions, in the spirit of fairness and civility, to
cease the practice of using American Indian mascots. However, the committee recognizes that such issues may be
addressed most effectively by the individual institution, its community and its
conference, rather than at the national level.
The Division I
Championships and Competition Cabinet believe
that institutions should be encouraged to review their situations and ensure
that their actions and policies are not contrary to the cabinet's statements on
nondiscrimination.
The Division
II Championships Committee supports a position that encourages and promotes an
atmosphere of respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person. In addition, the committee encourages the
Association to examine not only the use of American Indian mascots, nicknames
and logos, but also the activities and fan response to these symbols and what,
if any, penalties would institutions incur if these policies were not adhered
to.
Finally, the
Division III Championships Committee believes the focus of the study should be
based on the NCAA’s principles of the appropriate environment for championship
participants, among other foundational principles and appropriate behaviors of
people around the issue. It also
initially believes that the selection or use of American Indian mascots falls
within the realm of institutional autonomy and may not be an issue within the
purview of the Association.
The Division I Cabinet and
Division II and III Committees are committed to the creation and preservation
of quality championship opportunities for all student-athletes. Accordingly, each supports the
position that access to championship events should not be restricted because of
issues related to the use by institutions of American Indian mascots or images.
The governance
structure responses are attached as Appendix G.
Summary of Results:
Responses From the NCAA Membership and General Public.
The MOIC solicited comments regarding this issue from the NCAA membership and the general public. The MOIC publicized the opportunity to comment through the NCAA News, the NCAA web site and correspondence to groups and individuals. The Request for Comment document is attached as Appendix H. The MOIC received numerous comments and responses.
Ninety percent of the comments received supported the elimination of American Indian mascots, nicknames, images, and logos in intercollegiate athletics. Individuals who offered comments were both Native and non-Native. Also, comments were received from individuals who are associated with colleges and universities using American Indian mascots and from those who are not.
The committee noted five major themes emanated from those who wanted to eliminate the mascots:
1. American Indian mascots and the images create a negative atmosphere.
2. American Indian mascots are disrespectful, oppressive, and insulting.
3. The stereotypes damage self-esteem and are psychologically destructive.
4. American Indians are in the minority and therefore do not feel they have the ‘power’ to fight against those in the majority.
5. Those claiming to honor American Indians know little or nothing about American Indian culture.
Individuals who support retaining the use of American Indian mascots noted the need for institutional decision-making, rights of member schools, and the ability of mascots to honor the courage and strength of American Indian people.
The MOIC
forwarded correspondence to over 500 American Indian tribes and councils to
obtain their thoughts and comments.
A list of tribal councils and governments is attached as Appendix I.
The MOIC received a ten percent response rate from this group.
Discussion.
Ninety-nine
percent of responses in this category requested the NCAA ban the use of
American Indian mascots in intercollegiate athletics. Generally, American Indians view the use of mascots as
racist. Many feel that the
practice of using American Indian mascots is based on tradition and honor, held
over from an outdated time of racial intolerance and prejudice in this nation’s
history.
Many also feel
the NCAA is in a unique and important position to encourage and affect positive
change by directing the adoption of non-offensive team names, mascots, and
logos to preserve human decency and respect for one’s fellow citizens.
Summary of Results: Various Articles and Publications.
The MOIC
reviewed more than fifty pieces of literature presenting various perspectives
on this volatile issue. The
literature was very helpful in providing the MOIC with a reference point to
begin to frame the issues associated with this topic.
Determination of the Issues Surrounding
the use of American Indian Mascots in Intercollegiate Athletics.
The committee discovered that the use of American Indian mascots, nicknames and logos evokes both passionate allegiance and harsh criticism and is linked to deeply embedded values and worldviews. To supporters, these images honor indigenous people, embody institutional tradition, foster shared identity and intensify the pleasures of college athletics. To those who oppose them, the mascots give life to racial stereotypes, mock religious and ceremonial customs, validate prejudiced behavior towards all races, revive historical patterns of appropriation and oppression, and foster discomfort, pain and even terror among many American Indians.
While
arguments for and against American Indian mascots do vary, particularly from
community to community, primary arguments as articulated by those on both sides
of the issue have been identified below:
Arguments Against the use of American Indians as Mascots, Symbols,
and Images in Athletics Include:
1. Racist. The primary argument against American Indian mascots is that the mascots are racist. Opponents of these mascots point out that no other living ethnic group is identified as a mascot or symbol. Examples often used are the following: “Can you imagine the Houston Hispanics, the Washington Whities or the Boston Blacks?” (Opponents also note that the Fighting Irish refers to a nationality, not a race of people, and no ethnic group.) Opponents say that no one would think of appearing in black face in 2001, but because of American Indian mascots, no one questions appearing in “red face.”
2. Hostile Environment. Opponents assert that use of these mascots creates a hostile environment for all students, not just American Indians. By singling out a particular race, the university is creating an environment where members of all minority groups can feel threatened.
Opponents point out that, in the heat of sports rivalries, many actions take place that are inappropriate. But when a mascot is used that refers to living people, that inappropriate action becomes racist. American Indians may be hung in effigy or mocked by the actions of opposing teams.
Examples given here include the inflammatory shirts worn by North Dakota State University students. NDSU, whose mascot is the bison, is a rival of the University of North Dakota, whose mascot is the Fighting Sioux. NDSU students wear T-shirts with an American Indian caricature and oversized lips proclaiming, “Sioux suck.” Other T-shirts show a caricature of an American Indian kneeling suggestively between the legs of a bison. The language on those shirts is even more provocative. North Dakota’s American Indian students also have been threatened, and handmade posters have been found on campus calling for the “prairie niggers” to go home.
3. Misinformation Contrary to Institutions’ Educational Mission. Opponents assert that American Indian mascots give the public a stereotypical and historically incorrect perception of American Indians.
Such mascots are based on Wild West interpretations with costumes, dances, and music appropriated from the movies, not history. In reality, American Indians were forbidden by the government in the 1800s from dancing, wearing long hair, and paint.
Mascot opponents point to the government’s actions following the massacre at Wounded Knee, at which many American Indians were killed. Apparently, Wounded Knee happened because of a federal government crackdown on the religious revival that was the “ghost dance.” Following the massacre, the government permitted Wild Bill Cody to “parole” out 23 American Indians to take them overseas to participate in his Wild West Show. (The fake dance was okay with the Army; the real dance was not.)
Mascot opponents also note that Plains Indian dress is widely used for mascots because that’s what people (incorrectly) assume Indians looked like. The reason for that is that the wars between the Sioux Nation and the U.S. Government took place after the invention of photography, thus shaping what the public thought Indians “ought” to look like. In reality, the headdresses, buckskins suits and such portray only a tiny fraction of what the many different tribes of American Indians ever looked like. A primary example here, opponents say, is Illinois’ Chief Illiniwek, who wears the costume of a Lakota Sioux, dances to Hollywood drumbeats, and performs a dance choreographed by those Caucasians who portrayed him beginning in the Great Depression.
4. Damaging to Young People of all Races. Opponents assert that such stereotypical portrayal of a living people gives children of all races the impression that the American Indians are gone.
Some institutions’ athletics media guides have, in the past, even asserted that there is “no more” of a particular tribe. At any rate, a number of psychologists and associations of psychologists have asserted that using American Indians as mascots has a number of negative effects on children, including low self-esteem among American Indian children and perpetuating racism among non-American Indian children.
One researcher at Illinois noted that American Indian mascots were especially damaging in places where there were no American Indians to counterbalance the stereotypes. In other words, non-native children in Illinois were likely to believe that all the American Indians were dead, “like Chief Illiniwek’s people.” Children in New Mexico, which has a higher American Indian population, were more likely to encounter “real” American Indians as playmates. The researcher further noted that children in Illinois were hostile to “real” Indian children, even telling them that they “couldn’t be Indian because they didn’t look like the Chief.”
5. Sacrilegious. Opponents of American Indian mascots point out that the feathers, paint, costumes, and dances used by mascots are misappropriations of the feathers, paint, costumes, and dances used by American Indians in religious ceremonies. They indicate that these items have religious significance, making it all the more offensive to see them misused and mocked. Opponents also point to a prank by the Stanford band a number of years ago, in which the band had several members dressed up as nuns and swinging rosaries and chalices at a Notre Dame game. Apparently, the band was severely punished and Stanford apologized. Opponents of American Indian mascots ask why their religious articles are not so treasured by others.
6. Contrary to Diversity and Antidiscrimination Policies of Universities and the NCAA. Opponents of American Indian mascots point to antidiscrimination policies on campus and the Association and assert that mascots are in clear violation of these policies. If another university group -- which is what athletics is -- were to mock an ethnic group, opponents say, university officials would put an end to that activity. Opponents also note that the emblems and stereotypical imagery of American Indian mascots appear on shirts, banners and even gym floors of universities, thus giving the impression that the university does not find the image objectionable or contrary to its educational mission or diversity policy. Opponents also point to NCAA-logo t-shirts that feature American Indian names and logos, banners (including banners in the Hall of Champions) and NCAA championships, asking why the NCAA mark would be associated with what they term such racist imagery.
Arguments for the use of American Indians as Mascots, Symbols, and
Images in Athletics Include:
1. Meant to Honor. The primary argument for American Indian mascots is that they are “intended to honor” American Indians. This argument, which is asserted by virtually every proponent of American Indian mascots, notes that by using the mascot they are keeping alive the image of the American Indian and all of its good traits. Proponents indicate that they highlight the dignity, persistence and bravery of Indians, particularly in battle. Proponents state that the dances, war chants and other activities are meant to convey the idea that the American Indian had traits that the proponents wish to take on for the purposes of athletics competition. Even some proponents who acknowledge that they are, in essence, “playing Indian,” assert that no one is hurt by it and everyone enjoys it. They also point to a variety of groups, the Boy Scouts included, who have always played Indian and in doing so, have learned about Indians as a result.
2. No One Has Ever Objected, We Have No Indian Students. This is the second-most popular argument of proponents, and actually it’s probably where most institutions of higher education are right now. Most institutions currently do not have protesters, and many administrators are trying to deal with the issue before they do. (A note though, American Indian heritage is not always obvious, so many students and student-athletes, particularly those of African-American descent, do have American Indian heritage although they may not identify themselves as American Indian.)
3. It’s Dignified. A common argument of American Indian mascot proponents is that “their use is more dignified than others,” thus making it o.k. A number of institutions (the University of Illinois is probably the most prominent) call their mascots a “symbol” and note that its use is reserved for special appearances at special times and places. Some institutions have placed restrictions on how the mascot image may be used commercially and still be considered licensed. For example, some institutions have ceased permitting the sale of mascot-image toilet paper, boxer shorts, toilet lids or beer holders. Other institutions have ceased using human images and only use an arrow or an American Indian “dream-catcher” as their logo while retaining the Indian-associated name, like Warriors, Tribe or Savages.
4. We Have the Buy-in of Some Indian-Related Group. A few institutions, with Florida State probably being the most well known, have developed some type of a relationship with some members of a particular tribe. Proponents of American Indian mascots point out that this relationship gives them “permission” to use American Indian imagery. American Indians are loosely organized politically; however, it’s difficult for any institution to claim that they have the permission of the relevant people. For example, Seminoles outside of Florida (and even many inside the state) are opposed to Florida State’s usage.
5. Our Mascot is a Favorite of the Alumni, and They will Cease Donations if We Change. The most prominent example of this argument in action is the situation in North Dakota, where a prominent donor threatened to cease construction on a multimillion-dollar hockey arena if the mascot was changed. On the other hand, the faculty at Illinois heard a presentation by researchers who had measured alumni giving at a number of schools that had changed (Dartmouth and Stanford were among them) and had experienced no decrease in donations. However, many alumni of Illinois have stated, in newspaper articles and in letters to the administration, that they are opposed to changing the mascot.
6. Cannot Offend the Indians for They are Gone. An incredible number of students and alumni still make this argument, but few institutions publicly use this anymore. The University of Illinois used to claim that the Illini were gone, and a number of legends tell of their demise. They are actually alive and well in Peoria and they are on record opposing Chief Illiniwek.
7. It’s a Tradition. Though supported by the least amount of evidence, this remains perhaps the most compelling argument by mascot proponents. People become very attached to the traditions of their alma maters, and schools with American Indian mascots are no exception. Some people will always think of themselves as the Warriors, the Chiefs or the Tribe, and they want their children to be able to experience that same tradition. In some cases, such as in Illinois, the tradition goes back 60 or 70 years.
8. Indians Today, Who’s Next Tomorrow. The argument is never articulated this way. Instead, what’s said is that, “If we change because we’ve offended the Indians, what’s next? If we become the Beavers, are the beavers down by the river going to object? Are we not going to be able to be the Tigers because they’re endangered and the Animal Rights people will object? Are the Vikings or the Patriots going to object?” This argument has become more popular in the last several years, and it’s especially popular with the school boards of high schools. Again, the rarity of American Indians living in the community seems to go hand-in-hand with this particular argument. It’s unlikely to be heard in areas where a number of American Indians reside, probably because it is more obvious there that living people -- human beings -- are objecting, not animals, mythological figures or figures from history. This argument also is couched as “political-correctness gone wrong” and is asserted by those who feel that “minorities have gained too much control” or “minorities rights aren’t always right.”
The Role of the NCAA
The issues surrounding American Indian mascots are very delicate. It is an issue that sparks tremendous passion on both sides of the debate. Many people would say that this is an issue that should be decided locally and each institution should choose the decision that works best on their campus. Others may say that using these mascots should be acceptable and there are more important issues that the NCAA and its member institutions should worry about. Others may say that this is an issue of civil rights and discrimination and the NCAA and its members must take a stand and eliminate the use of these mascots. The MOIC must review all of these perspectives and determine what it believes the NCAA’s response should be.
In the course of its review, the committee looked at possible courses of action that could be employed to address this issue.
The NCAA selects institutions to host selected NCAA post-season championships. The NCAA could forbid institutions with offensive American Indian mascots from hosting such championships in an effort to ensure athletics venues promote an atmosphere of respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person.
4. Revenue Distribution. The NCAA provides revenue to its member institution through the following distributions: supplemental, basketball fund, divisional enhancement fund, academic enhancement fund, conference grant, special assistance fund, sports-sponsorship, grants-in-aid and the student-athlete opportunities fund. The NCAA could begin to enforce a policy that would restrict member institutions with offensive American Indian mascots from receiving one, some or all of these monies. Legislation could take care of this as well as modifying the eligibility criteria for the various distributions.
5. Fines. The NCAA could institute fines for institutions that continue to use American Indian mascots. Institutions would be charged a prescribed amount of money for using an American Indian mascot. The charges would continue to be levied until the institution chooses a different mascot. The monies generated by the fines could be used for a number of worthwhile initiatives.
Conclusion
In completing
its charge, the MOIC has conducted a comprehensive review of issues surrounding
the use of American Indian mascots in intercollegiate athletics.
The committee believes institutions currently using American Indian mascots, nicknames, and symbols often do so as part of an honored and revered college tradition, established to emulate noble qualities of American Indian people and their culture, such as courage, dignity, strength and loyalty. Often the intent in using American Indian mascots, nicknames and logos in intercollegiate athletics is to honor these people and the culture.
However, in
acknowledgment of today’s diverse society, the global expansion of higher
education, and the NCAA Constitution that supports the honor and dignity of all
persons; the committee believes when American Indians are used as a mascot,
harmful stereotypes may result.
While the committee feels that it is time for this tradition to be
retired, we acknowledge and support a member institutions’ self-determination
on this issue.
We believe the noble qualities of courage, dignity, strength and loyalty are human qualities and are equally present in every race, ethnic background, religion and culture. American Indians are not endowed with any ancient or new age mysticism; neither are they a sub-human Warrior race, nor are they super-human, they are merely human. In listening to American Indians, we understand that good intentions by institutions to honor Indian people do not always yield good results.
The committee points out that a change in tradition is not an indication that institutions were “wrong” in the past or that institutions harbor ill will toward American Indians. It is simply an acknowledgement of changing times and growing awareness and sensitivity.
Our review
illustrates that current uses of American Indian mascots by NCAA member
institutions range from being respectful to offensive. Accordingly, the MOIC believes that
institutions using American Indian mascots, nicknames and logos should review
the depiction of and behavior associated with the use by athletic teams,
cheerleaders, band members, other auxiliary groups, and fans. Further, those aspects that are
offensive should be eliminated to ensure that the NCAA’s principles of cultural
diversity and gender equity, sportsmanship and ethical conduct and
nondiscrimination are adhered to during all athletic events.
The committee
makes no recommendations regarding fines or revenues policies. These are matters that appropriate NCAA
bodies may wish to discuss. We do
offer recommendations requiring legislative action and championships in our
report.
Recommendations
The MOIC
believes specific recommendations in the following three areas should reduce
offensive uses of American Indian mascots, nicknames, logos, and behaviors in
intercollegiate athletics:
a.
Require
institutions currently using American Indian mascots to complete a
self-analysis checklist to determine if the depiction of the mascot, nickname,
logo, or behaviors can be viewed as offensive.
Components of the Self-Analysis Checklist will Include:
(1)
Adherence to NCAA Constitution Article 2.2.2,
2.4 and 2.6.
(2)
Efforts to assess behavior of the mascot,
cheerleaders, band members, and fans and the relevance of symbols.
(3)
Efforts to educate athletic audiences on the
specific tribe or American Indians generally.
(4)
Efforts to recruit and retain American Indian
coaching and administrative staff as well as university faculty and staff.
(5)
Educational programs on Native American history
and culture for students.
(6)
Efforts to educate staff, fans, and spectators
on sportsmanship related to mascots.
(7)
Efforts to provide outreach to the American
Indian community.
b.
Require the
self-analysis be conducted through a broad-base review including
representatives from the department of athletics, faculty and staff, community,
student-athletes, conference office and local American Indian tribes or
community members.
c.
Require the
self-analysis must be submitted as part of the certification process for
Division I institutions or the self-assessment process for Division II and
Division III institutions (legislative action required).
a. Require
NCAA conferences with institutions using American Indian mascots or nicknames
to review policies regarding contests.
Policies to be reviewed should include championships, sportsmanship,
etc.
b. Require
conferences with institutions using American Indian mascots or nicknames to
complete a self-analysis checklist for conference championship venues and host
institutions. Self-analysis
checklist to include:
(1)
Adherence to NCAA Constitution Articles 2.2.2,
2.4 and 2.6.
(2)
Efforts to assess behavior of the mascot,
cheerleaders, band members and fans and the relevance of symbols.
(3)
Efforts to educate staff, fans, and spectators
on sportsmanship related to mascots.
a. Continue to monitor the use of American
Indian mascots, nicknames, logos and behaviors, including the periodic
monitoring of the self-analysis checklists.
b. Establish criteria for NCAA championships
sites and venues that include the review of the visibility of American Indian
mascots, logos and symbols.
c.
Establish
criteria for institutions participating in NCAA championship events to ensure
adherence to NCAA Constitution Articles 2.2.2, 2.4 and 2.6.
d.
Eliminate
references to American Indian mascot names, nicknames, and logos in NCAA
publications and announcements.