REPORT OF THE
DIVISION III INTERPRETATIONS AND LEGISLATION COMMITTEE
1. ACTION ITEMS.
a. Modification Based on Intent – NCAA Bylaw 17.1.4 (Sports Subject to Segment Limitation).
(1) Recommendation: Intent-based modification of Bylaw 17.1.4 to indicate that all sports are limited to a playing and practice season of 21 weeks, including those sports in which the National Collegiate Championship is the only championships opportunity. This revision is consistent with the intent of 2001 NCAA Convention Proposal No. 62 (length of playing season -- National Collegiate Sports).
(2) Rationale: 2001 Convention Proposal No. 62 limited all NCAA Division III sports to a 21 week playing and practice season. However, the original proposal did not modify Bylaw 17.1.4 to reflect this change.
b. Senior Woman Administrator (SWA).
(1) Recommendation: Sponsor legislation for the 2002 NCAA Convention to require an institution with a female director of athletics to appoint a separate female as the SWA.
(2) Rationale: The NCAA Division III Interpretations and Legislation Committee agreed that this legislation is consistent with the intent of the original SWA legislation.
c. 2002 Convention Discussion Session.
(1) Recommendation: Conduct a discussion session at the 2002 Convention on the topic of possible changes to the current legislative cycle.
(2) Rationale: The committee added "evaluation/assessment of the current legislative cycle" to its operations plan. In its discussion, the committee noted the need for membership input. The committee will present the membership with several options for discussion at the 2002 Convention.
d. Interpretation – Academic Fraud.
(1) Recommendation: Approve the following interpretation relating to academic fraud:
The committee reviewed the application of Bylaw 10.1-(b) as it relates to academic fraud and agreed that the following guidelines generally should be used in determining whether an incident of academic fraud should be reported to the NCAA as a violation of Bylaw 10.1-(b) or should be handled exclusively at the institutional level in accordance with its policies applicable to all students.
a. The committee confirmed that an institution is required to report a violation of Bylaw 10.1-(b) any time an institutional staff member (e.g., coach, professor, tutor, teaching assistant) knowingly is involved in arranging fraudulent academic credit or false transcripts for a prospective or enrolled student-athlete, regardless of whether the institutional staff member acted alone or in concert with the prospective or enrolled student-athlete.
b. The committee confirmed that an institution is required to report a violation of Bylaw 10.1-(b) any time a student-athlete, acting alone or in concert with others, knowingly becomes involved in arranging fraudulent academic credit or false transcripts, regardless of whether such conduct results in an erroneous declaration of eligibility.
c. If a student-athlete commits an academic offense (e.g., cheating on a test, plagiarism on a term paper) with no involvement of an institutional staff member, the institution is not required to report a violation of Bylaw 10.1-(b), unless the academic offense results in an erroneous declaration of eligibility and the student-athlete subsequently competes for the institution.
Finally, the committee noted that in all cases in which a student-athlete knowingly engages in conduct that violates institutional policies, the institution in all cases is required to handle a student-athlete's academic offense in accordance with its established academic policies applicable to all students, regardless of whether the violation is reportable under Bylaw 10.1-(b)] or whether the student-athlete was acting along or in concert with others. [Reference: Bylaw 10.1-(b)]
(2) Rationale: The committee agreed that this interpretation clearly identifies instances when academic fraud is a violation of NCAA legislation. The committee noted that this interpretation is consistent with the wishes of the Faculty Athletics Representatives Association and NCAA Divisions I and II.
e. Interpretation – Benefits Resulting from an Established Relationship.
(1) Recommendation: Approve the following interpretation relating to benefits received by a prospect or student-athlete resulting from an established relationship:
The committee reviewed the application of NCAA Bylaw 12.1.1.1.6 as it relates to factual situations in which an individual (student-athlete or prospective student-athlete) has received benefits prior to or during collegiate enrollment from someone other than a family member or legal guardian, and agreed that the following objective guidelines generally should be used in determining whether such benefits are contrary to the legislation:
1. Did the relationship between the athlete (or the athlete's parents) and the individual providing the benefit(s) develop as a result of the athlete's participation in athletics or notoriety related thereto?
2. Did the relationship between the athlete (or the athlete's parents) and the individual providing the benefit(s) predate the athlete's status as a prospective student-athlete?
3. Did the relationship between the athlete (or the athlete's parents) and the individual providing the benefit(s) predate the athlete's status achieved as a result of his or her athletics ability or reputation?
4. Was the pattern of benefits provided by the individual to the athlete (or the athlete's parents) prior to the athlete attaining notoriety as a skilled athlete similar in nature to those provided after attaining such stature?
The committee, however, noted that the origin and duration of a relationship and the consistency of benefits provided during the relationship are key factors in determining whether the benefits provided are contrary to the spirit and intent of Bylaw 12.1.1.1.6.
The committee determined that prior to initial full-time collegiate enrollment, a prospective student-athlete may receive normal and reasonable living expenses from an individual with whom the student-athlete has an established relationship (e.g., high-school coach, nonscholastic athletics team coach, family of a teammate), even if the relationship developed as a result of athletics participation, provided:
1. The individual is not an agent;
2. The individual is not an athletics representative of a particular institution involved in recruiting the prospect; and
3. Such living expenses are consistent with the types of expenses provided by the individual as a part of normal living arrangements (e.g., housing, meals, occasional spending money, use of the family car).
The committee noted that the aforementioned interpretation does not apply to individuals who have no logical ties to the prospect. It also noted that a current student-athlete who, prior to initial collegiate enrollment, has been receiving normal and reasonable living expenses from an individual with whom he or she has an established relationship may continue to receive occasional benefits (e.g., meals during campus visits, reasonable entertainment) from an individual or family with whom the student-athlete has an established relationship. Such expenses may not include educational expenses associated with a grant-in-aid (i.e., tuition and fees, room and board, and required course-related books). [Reference: Bylaw 12.1.1.1.6 (preferential treatment, benefits or services)]
(2) Rationale: The committee agreed that, while this issue does not have a dramatic affect on Division III, it is important for all three divisions to be consistent. Thus, this interpretation is consistent with those issued by Divisions I and II.
f. NCAA Division III Scrimmage Opportunities.
(1) Recommendation: Sponsor legislation for the 2002 Convention to permit all sports, individual and team, except for the sports of baseball, softball, lacrosse, rowing and water polo to be provided one preseason exempt team scrimmage/date of competition, conducted in privacy and provided each team does not miss class time, that may be conducted during the preseason practice period. All current scrimmage opportunities would be replaced by the new opportunity. The committee noted that spring sports have additional opportunities for competition and practice during the nontraditional segment, which eliminated the need to create an exempted scrimmage for those sports. (See attachments for more detail and information.)
(2) Rationale: The committee reviewed the current scrimmage opportunities available to all sports. Additionally, the committee reviewed each sport on a team versus individual sport basis during the applicable sports season (i.e., fall, winter, spring) in an attempt to create consistent opportunities for all sports. It was
noted that inherent differences remain between each sport; however, the committee agreed that there should be consistent scrimmage opportunities available to all sports.
2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS.
a. Deregulation – Glossary of Terms. The committee reviewed the second draft of the glossary of terms and made several editorial changes. The committee will review the revised version during the coming months and plans to present this information to the NCAA Division III Management Council in July.
b. Deregulation – Review of Bylaw 17. The committee will focus on the following four essential areas during its review of Bylaw 17: (1) consistent delivery of legislation; (2) chart/figure enhancement; (3) chart repetition; and (4) general format and content issues.
c. Incorporated Interpretations. The committee agreed to incorporate three interpretations into the 2001-02 Manual. Incorporated interpretations are as follows:
(1) May 5, 2000, Item No. 2. 4-2-4 Transfers - Multiple Two-Year Colleges;
(2) September 14, 2000, Item No. 1. Five-Sport/Three-Season Requirement – One Sport Each Season; and
(3) November 13, 2000, Item No. 1. Competition in the Nontraditional Segment.
Chair: Suzanne Coffey, Bates College
Staff liaison(s): Chris T. Martin